Re: ACTION-390: alternative UA affordances for DNT choice

Alan, 

I was waiting for that question because it looks at the world with the 
eyes of a lawyer :) 

The text does not have to target the user agent. "User agent" is just 
something that can initiate an HTTP request. So "user agent" is nothing 
that can be liable. 

What you're looking for are statements of conformance. My software is 
conformant to the the Tracking Protection Standard. Now the implementer 
has to show that the user is informed before making a decision to be 
conformant, however this software informs the user (the MP3 player may 
read it out to you). The fact that a legal entity is making claims of 
conformance without informing the user is the connection you need for 
liability. 

So talking about the "user" instead of the "user agent" actually does 
the trick. So you need to find a wording that addresses the requirements 
from a user perspective. What do we need to provide -at least- to the 
user to be conformant. This somewhat satisfies Ed's use case and David's 
remarks. 

 --Rigo

On Thursday 25 April 2013 14:14:12 Alan Chapell wrote:
> Thanks Rigo. 
> 
> Let me ask what may appear to be a dumb question. In your view, who is
> responsible for ensuring informed consent - if not the User Agent?

Received on Friday, 26 April 2013 00:21:39 UTC