- From: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 02:21:10 +0200
- To: Alan Chapell <achapell@chapellassociates.com>
- Cc: public-tracking@w3.org, David Singer <singer@apple.com>, "Edward W. Felten" <felten@cs.princeton.edu>
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