Re: Batch closing of TPE related issues

Hi Rigo,

I fully agree. However, I do not see a way to prevent that a company 
removes a UGE and pushes an OOBC (after an appropriate notice page).

The important things are:
- UGEs should be the preferred type of exception
- UGE should be user-controlled (visible and deletable)
- If you remove a UGE, tracking should stop

Regards,
matthias


On 18/06/2013 10:18, Rigo Wenning wrote:
> On Monday 10 June 2013 14:39:48 Matthias Schunter wrote:
>> Do I understand you correctly that
>> - you are concerned if UGEs are translated into out of band
>> exceptions?
> Matthias, have you ever tried to revoke your consent or to opt out of
> one of those ridiculous UK ICO cookie banners?
>
> I think that a UGE MUST NOT be translated into OOBC, a user MUST be able
> to revoke UGE by deleting the exception in the store.
>
> The whole point of DNT is a centralized opt-out in the browser. This
> means Shane's local duplication is meaningless. It may only serve as a
> memory for some historical state, but MUST NOT overwrite the status of
> the UGE store in the browser. Otherwise the exercise is futile because
> Johnny can't opt out anymore.
>
>   --Rigo

Received on Tuesday, 18 June 2013 12:05:34 UTC