Re: Change proposal: new general principle for permitted uses

I agree with Mike here.  I still don't understand the need for the permitted use. I also don't understand why industry is fine with its own opt-out, but doesn't want to honor DNT:1 as an opt-out.


On Jul 23, 2013, at 12:10 AM, Mike O'Neill <michael.oneill@baycloud.com> wrote:

> Rigo,
> 
> If user profiles are not used or built then why the necessity for
> singling-out? Why have we not been given a definitive reason for
> collecting/using UIDs?
> 
> Making the text work is not the only option, we could just not agree to the
> permitted use. The necessity for one has not been adequately justified.
> 
> Mike
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rigo Wenning [mailto:rigo@w3.org] 
> Sent: 23 July 2013 00:20
> To: public-tracking@w3.org; rob@blaeu.com
> Subject: Re: Change proposal: new general principle for permitted uses
> 
> Rob, 
> 
> before we take that on, we have to match Kathy's suggestion with Ronan's
> interpretation. I have repeatedly asked whether audience measurement is used
> to target users either by changing their view on the web or by allowing a
> real time adaption of web content. 
> 
> I was always told, this is not the case and that sporting interpretations to
> the contrary only engage those who are making them. 
> This is why Kathy included the bit about the recognized QA mechanism by the
> professional associations. 
> 
> If you have concerns about people giving misinterpretations to Kathy's text,
> please indicate where those are. We can not lock down the practice of a
> theoretic audience measurement company interpreting the text as a permission
> to create user profiles under the permitted use of "audience measurement".
> The only thing we can do is to make Kathy's text work. 
> 
> And it may also be clear that a far too creative interpretation of wording
> from a potential compliance specification will not always be accepted by all
> authorities. So before killing Shane's vision of one data store for
> permitted uses that you treat respectfully, I want to make sure we are not
> only talking past each other . 
> 
> --Rigo
> 
> On Monday 22 July 2013 16:34:01 Rob van Eijk wrote:
>> Peter,
>> 
>> I added a proposal for a new general principle for permitted uses to 
>> the wiki:
>> 
>> The reason this is relevant, is the recent discussion on audience 
>> measurement and frequency capping. An identifier set for one permitted 
>> use is currently not prohibited to use for another permitted use.
>> 
>> 
>> == New general principle for permitted uses ==
>> 
>> 
>> 5.2.5 no matching/syncing between permitted uses
>> 
>> Data collected or retained by a party for a specific permitted use 
>> must not be matched or synced with data from other permitted uses.
>> 
>> Disallowed Example: cookie syncing between permitted uses.
> 
>

Received on Tuesday, 23 July 2013 17:48:35 UTC