W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > October 2012

Re: ACTION-255: Work on financial reporting text as alternative to legal requirements

From: Dobbs, Brooks <Brooks.Dobbs@kbmg.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 21:16:42 +0000
To: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>, "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>
CC: Alan Chapell <achapell@chapellassociates.com>, Nicholas Doty <npdoty@w3.org>
Message-ID: <2B40EB3A3384EB4CB812241DDDC41D870531E2@KBMEXMBXPR01.kbm1.loc>

I hear you that it may seem silly to start from a presumption of guilt,
but I note that we already do many things to accommodate this.  In the US,
most male doctors don't, as a standard practice, mistreat undressed female
patients, but they do, as a standard practice, have a female employee
present in the exam room as evidentiary support that the doctor was well
behaved.  Arguably here the patient's privacy has been unnecessarily
compromised by the inclusion of another party, but it is deemed entirely
reasonable that the doctor would want a record of his good practice - even
if this means a slightly less private setting for the patient.

Limiting people's ability to provide an active defense to very real
threats is a very harsh position and one that shouldn't be considered



Brooks Dobbs, CIPP | Chief Privacy Officer | KBM Group | Part of the
Wunderman Network
(Tel) 678 580 2683 | (Mob) 678 492 1662 | kbmg.com

This email  including attachments  may contain confidential information.
If you are not the intended recipient,
 do not copy, distribute or act on it. Instead, notify the sender
immediately and delete the message.

On 10/1/12 4:46 PM, "Rigo Wenning" <rigo@w3.org> wrote:

>On Monday 01 October 2012 20:25:19 Dobbs, Brooks wrote:
>> Another example that just sprung to mind along Alan's line of
>> thinking is pharmaceuticals.  I know pharmaceutical advertisers
>> who may store both the IP address of the adserving serving event
>> and the referring URL (site on which the ad appeared) to comply
>> with requirements that they not market certain regulated products
>> outside of certain geographical confines.
>Than they should also record all IP addresses and requests and store
>them indefinitely to provide evidence that they did not send porn
>out before 10pm. This case assumes that our society has the
>principle of presumption of culpability. In such a society we need
>to provide evidence that we haven't infringed anything. :)
>I know that those are real cases. But wait a second. What should we
>back here? Their paranoia? If those services are paranoid, they
>should openly admit their data collection. And not doing so under
>DNT:1 and permitted uses. If there is a law obliging them, this is
>not an issue. The law prevails.
Received on Monday, 1 October 2012 21:17:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:44:58 UTC