Re: tracking-ISSUE-215: data hygiene approach / tracking of URL data and browsing activity [Compliance June]

Justin is correct, especially in the light of the growth of data providers partnering together to help create contemporary scoring/targeting products.  The use of data cooperatives, for example, bring a never-ending data set for such scoring that is available to ad networks and others.


Jeffrey Chester
Center for Digital Democracy
1621 Connecticut Ave, NW, Suite 550
Washington, DC 20009
www.democraticmedia.org
www.digitalads.org
202-986-2220

On Jul 11, 2013, at 7:39 AM, Justin Brookman wrote:

> I'm not saying they do, I'm just saying they could under this definition of tracking.
> 
> Sent from mobile, please excuse curtness and typos
> 
> 
> Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com> wrote:
> 
> I’ve attempted to address Rigo’s questions in a separate email and Susan answered the 1st party transfer question as well. 
> 
>  
> 
> Ad Networks don’t “sync attributes/scores” (perhaps a misconception by some in the group) because each company’s approach to scoring and the logic that supports that effort is significantly different for each and is typically the element they are competing on (my algorithm is better than your algorithm). 
> 
>  
> 
> - Shane
> 
>  
> 
> From: Justin Brookman [mailto:jbrookman@cdt.org] 
> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 7:28 PM
> To: Rob van Eijk
> Cc: Shane Wiley; Rigo Wenning; public-tracking@w3.org
> Subject: Re: tracking-ISSUE-215: data hygiene approach / tracking of URL data and browsing activity [Compliance June]
> 
>  
> 
> As I read the (as-amended) DAA proposal, data enrichment would be OK.  Third parties can collect PII from a publisher (or otherwise) and then append demographic/other data to that profile.  Or they could sync attributes/scores with other ad networks.  All that is out of scope, because tracking is limited to retention and use of precise domains/urls.
> 
>  
> 
> OTOH, I believe that practice would be prohibited under Section 5 of the June draft.
> 
>  
> 
> Justin Brookman
> Director, Consumer Privacy
> Center for Democracy & Technology
> tel 202.407.8812
> justin@cdt.org
> http://www.cdt.org
> @JustinBrookman
> @CenDemTech
> 
>  
> 
> On Jul 10, 2013, at 2:20 PM, Rob van Eijk <rob@blaeu.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shane,
> 
> How does DNT interact with data exchanges? Are they allowed to enrich the combination of an <ID,scoring>, or is that out of scope because it is not tracking?
> 
> Rob
> 
> 
> Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com> wrote:
> 
> Rigo,
> 
> Incorrect - no permitted use is needed as aggregate scoring is "not tracking" in that there is no retention of a user's cross-site browsing history in this case.  DNT compliance is removing the linkage between browsing activity and a user/device.
> 
> - Shane
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rigo Wenning [mailto:rigo@w3.org] 
> Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 6:22 PM
> To: public-tracking@w3.org
> Cc: Shane Wiley; Rob van Eijk
> Subject: Re: tracking-ISSUE-215: data hygiene approach / tracking of URL data and browsing activity [Compliance June]
> 
> On Wednesday 10 July 2013 16:23:45 Shane Wiley wrote:
> Activate the profiling opt-out (available via industry opt-out pages, 
> AdChoices icon, Chrome "K!
>  eep My
> Opt-Outs", industry persistency tools, 
> TACO, etc.).
> 
> Opt-outs are great, please use mine! :) So you need a permitted use to ignore the DNT signal and only listen to other opt-outs. But why would you claim compliance to DNT here in the first place? I don't understand the goal of the permitted use here within the DNT concept. 
> 
> --Rigo
> 
>  
>