- From: Peter Swire <peter@peterswire.net>
- Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 04:46:05 -0700
- To: "rob@blaeu.com" <rob@blaeu.com>, Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>, "jeff@democraticmedia.org" <jeff@democraticmedia.org>, Kathy Joe <kathy@esomar.org>, "Susan_Israel@Comcast.com" <Susan_Israel@comcast.com>, Richard Weaver <rweaver@comscore.com>, "Adam I.C. Phillips Phillips" <adam.phillips@realresearch.co.uk>
- CC: Mailing List <public-tracking@w3.org>
Rob: Thank you for this helpful update on your view. Peter Prof. Peter P. Swire C. William O'Neill Professor of Law Ohio State University 240.994.4142 www.peterswire.net Beginning August 2013: Nancy J. and Lawrence P. Huang Professor Law and Ethics Program Scheller College of Business Georgia Institute of Technology -----Original Message----- From: Rob van Eijk <rob@blaeu.com> Reply-To: "rob@blaeu.com" <rob@blaeu.com> Date: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 3:21 AM To: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>, "jeff@democraticmedia.org" <jeff@democraticmedia.org>, Kathy Joe <kathy@esomar.org>, "Susan_Israel@Comcast.com" <Susan_Israel@comcast.com>, Richard Weaver <rweaver@comscore.com>, "Adam I.C. Phillips Phillips" <adam.phillips@realresearch.co.uk>, Peter Swire <peter@peterswire.net> Cc: Mailing List <public-tracking@w3.org> Subject: Re: ISSUE 25: ACTION 415: Audience measurement research > >Peter, > >After talking to Rigo last night, I see the progress on the normative >language and specifically in purpose limitation and not applying the >audience measurement data to individuals, a computer of device. I see >the right mindset in terms of privicy by design: changing data from a >site visitor into data about a site object. > >Since we are negotiating here: if Audience Measurement becomes a >permitted use, than Shane's proposal to allow the collection of intrest >categories before de-identification needs to go off the table. > >Rob > >Rigo Wenning schreef op 2013-07-02 19:27: >> Dear all, >> >> based on the text attached at the end of this email, that I received >> today from Kathy, and that was discussed during a call today, I >> withdraw >> my requirement for a minimum bucket size of 812 people. I support the >> new text suggested as attached: >> >> ==== >> Information may be collected, retained and used by a third party for >> audience measurement research where the information is used to >> calibrate, validate or calculate through data collected from opted-in >> panels, which in part contains information collected across sites and >> over time from user agents. >> >> >> A third party eligible for an audience measurement research permitted >> use MUST adhere to the following restrictions. The data collected by >> the >> third party: >> >> ? Must be pseudonymised before statistical analysis begins, and >> ? Must not be shared with any other party unless the data are de- >> identified prior to sharing, and >> ? Must be deleted or de-identified as early as possible after the >> purpose of collection is met and in no case shall such retention, >> prior >> to de-identification, exceed 53 weeks and >> ? Must not be used for any other independent purpose including >> changing an individual¡¯s user experience or building a profile for ad >> targeting purposes. >> ? In addition, the third party must be subject to an independent >> certification process under the oversight of a generally-accepted >> market >> research industry organization that maintains a web platform providing >> user information about audience measurement research. This web >> platform >> lists the parties eligible to collect information under DNT standards >> and the audience measurement research permitted use and it provides >> users with an opportunity to exclude their data contribution. >> >> Non-normative: collection and use for audience measurement research >> >> Audience measurement research creates statistical measures of the >> reach >> in relation to the total online population, and frequency of exposure >> of >> the content to the online audience, including paid components of web >> pages. >> >> Audience measurement research for DNT purposes originates with opt-in >> panel output that is calibrated by counting actual hits on tagged >> content on websites. The panel output is re-adjusted using data >> collected from a broader online audience in order to ensure data >> produced from the panel accurately represents the whole online >> audience. >> >> This online data is collected on a first party and third party basis. >> This collection tracks the content accessed by a device rather than >> involving the collection of a user¡¯s browser history. Audience >> measurement is centered around specific content, not around a user. >> >> The collected data is retained for a given period for purposes of >> sample >> quality control, and auditing. During this retention period >> contractual >> measures must be in place to limit access to, and protect the data, as >> well as restrict the data from other uses. This retention period is >> set >> by auditing bodies, after which the data must be de-identified. >> >> The purposes of audience measurement research must be limited to: >> >> ¡¤ Facilitating online media valuation, planning and buying via >> accurate and reliable audience measurement. >> ¡¤ Optimizing content and placement on an individual site. >> >> The term ¡°audience measurement research¡± does not include sales, >> promotional, or marketing activities directed at a specific computer >> or >> device. Audience measurement data must be reported as aggregated >> information such that no recipient is able to build commercial >> profiles >> about particular individuals or devices. >> >> === >> >> As there is no other concrete text proposal, I would hope that we can >> reach consensus on this proposal to be included as a permitted use in >> the Compliance Specification and close ISSUE-25. >> >> --Rigo >> >> On Tuesday 02 July 2013 18:05:28 Kathy Joe wrote: >>> Following up on this action, as part of a series of calls, the two >>> most recent amendments to the normative text were discussed today in >>> a call with Rigo Wenning, Susan Israel, Richard Weaver and Adam >>> Phillips where it was clarified: >>> >>> ŒCalibrate, validate or calculate through©ö Susan noted this was added >>> to more clearly express that the panel data is used to better >>> understand the census data, in addition to the census data being used >>> to calibrate the panel data so that each informs the other. This does >>> not radically change the process - it just describes it more clearly. >>> >>> ŒMust not be used for any other independent purposes including >>> changing an individual©ös user experience or building a profile for ad >>> targeting purposes©ö. This had already been added to cover concerns >>> like those that have been expressed on the list by Rigo and Jeff >>> Chester, which Rigo further explained to us on the call -- that an >>> audience measurement research permitted use would allow data to be >>> collected and used for another purpose, ie to change a piece of >>> advertising inflight or for addressability to particular, small >>> target groups based on user profiles, with the potential for abuse, >>> such as through redlining or offering different prices to users with >>> different profiles. This is not the purpose of, and is excluded from >>> the AMR permitted use, which is to provide a general measurement of >>> an audience (ie the number of viewers and general characteristics of >>> the audience that saw a piece of content). The only use of AMR to >>> determine any pricing would be that a web site owner could charge an >>> advertiser or media buyer a higher rate based on traffic to a >>> website. >>> >>> Comments are welcome and we will arrange additional calls with Justin >>> Brookman and Jeff Chester.
Received on Wednesday, 3 July 2013 11:46:35 UTC