Re: Third-Party Web Tracking: Policy and Technology Paper outlining harms of tracking

Hi Alan,

I am contributing to the creation of a global meaningful DNT for both 
sides of the atlantic. I trust you have read yesterday's speech of mrs. 
Kroes on Do Not Track.

I have been looking at ISSUE45 as well and expressed both hope and 

Maybe we need the regulatory hook to make DNT useful, granular and 
valuable, maybe not. In the end, the W3C standardisation process of DNT 
should give rise to technical building blocks to solve a global problem.


Alan Chapell schreef op 2012-10-12 08:15:
> Hi Rob,
> On 10/11/12 6:36 PM, "Rob van Eijk" <> wrote:
>>With all respect, the TPWG is working towards affirmative opt-in
>>consent for third-party web tracking.
> I'm a bit surprised by your assertion. While it may be the law of the 
> land
> in the Netherlands, I'm not sure that opt-in for cookies is the law 
> of the
> land throughout the rest of Europe - and certainly it is not so in 
> the U.S.
> And I absolutely didn't think it was the goal of the TPWG to move 
> towards
> affirmative consent for third-party web tracking.
> This apparent disconnect in goals seems an excellent argument in 
> favor of
> David Wainberg's proposal (ISSUE-45 ACTION-246 Clarified proposal on
> compliance statements)
> In any event, can you help clarify your statement? Thanks.
>>Let me name just one example: the
>>principle of meaningful interaction. Also, for me at least, the 
>> enabling
>>of DNT as a means to express user consent through browser settings 
>> and
>>the actual default DNT value (on, off, unset) are two distinct 
>> different

Received on Friday, 12 October 2012 06:51:20 UTC