- From: Rob van Eijk <rob@blaeu.com>
- Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 11:36:13 +0200
- To: <public-tracking@w3.org>
Roy T. Fielding schreef op 2012-09-05 10:29: (...) > I am trying to define tracking, not their worries. If folks can > talk about what the above does not cover, then we can look for some > wording that plugs the gaps. Or we can start with any of the four > other definitions that I have proposed. Or some new definition, > if someone gets an inspiration. > > ....Roy Hi Roy, Two years ago I started with my own definition of tracking: 'The non-consensual collection or processing of data for the purpose of systematic monitoring or profiling of user’s habits across websites'. Since then my thinking has evolved. Instead of continuing in a cacophony of what stakeholders think is tracking I propose the taxonomical approach. I propose to Take Soleve's taxonomy as a starting point. To me this makes sense, because it fits privacy violations and concerns. A taxonomy arranges according to similaties in properties. See for example Solove [1] for a taxonomy: [2]: "Privacy is a concept in disarray. Nobody can articulate what it means. As one commentator has observed, privacy suffers from an embarrassment of meanings. Privacy is far too vague a concept to guide adjudication and lawmaking, as abstract incantations of the importance of privacy do not fare well when pitted against more concretely-stated countervailing interests. In 1960, the famous torts scholar William Prosser attempted to make sense of the landscape of privacy law by identifying four different interests. But Prosser focused only on tort law, and the law of information privacy is significantly more vast and complex, extending to Fourth Amendment law, the constitutional right to information privacy, evidentiary privileges, dozens of federal privacy statutes, and hundreds of state statutes. Moreover, Prosser wrote over 40 years ago, and new technologies have given rise to a panoply of new privacy harms. A new taxonomy to understand privacy violations is thus sorely needed. This article develops a taxonomy to identify privacy problems in a comprehensive and concrete manner. It endeavors to guide the law toward a more coherent understanding of privacy and to serve as a framework for the future development of the field of privacy law." The lesson learned from defining cloud computing, is that there are many definitions of what it may be. The same is with a defintion of privacy. Tracking suffers the same problem. Mapping permitted uses to the taxonomy is possible. Looking at David's approach, a strict core def, with exceptions for difficult cases, could fit into a topological approach. -- Rob [1] D. J. Solove. A Taxonomy of Privacy. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 154(3):477–560, Jan. 2005. [2] http://www.citeulike.org/group/1598/article/1059403
Received on Wednesday, 5 September 2012 09:39:08 UTC