Re: June Change Proposal, raw data, contextual ads

Am I correct that no interaction (profiling and targeting) data from a DNT:1 user can be collected from their interactions with contextual ads?  As contextual advertising has grown more sophisticated, including user-intensive semantic and emotional analysis and delivered via RTB, they raise DNT concerns.  For example, one semantic targeter explains that marketers can "Leverage the accuracy of semantic technology, by selecting
between 900+ IAB categories, emotions, buyer intentions and entities, to create limitless custom segments on-the-fly and unique to each campaign"   http://www.admantx.com/wordpress/#admantx;  video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=s64I2Ft824g#at=51

The contextual targeting frame should not be permitted to be a serious privacy loophole.  Perhaps the text needs clarification?

Thanks,

Jeff


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 Jun 30, 2013, at 7:08 AM, Thomas Roessler wrote:

> Thanks, David.
> 
> This is now incorporated into this wiki page:
> 	http://www.w3.org/wiki/Privacy/TPWG/Change_Proposal_Short_Term
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Thomas Roessler, W3C <tlr@w3.org> (@roessler)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 2013-06-26, at 19:21 +0200, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Jun 20, 2013, at 15:19 , David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Problem
>>> 
>>> "It is outside the scope of this specification to control short-term, transient collection and use of data, so long as the information is not transmitted to a third party and is not used to build a profile about a user or otherwise alter an individual user’s user experience outside the current network interaction. For example, the contextual customization of ads shown as part of the same network interaction is not restricted by DNT: 1."
>>> 
>>> 1) It's not just altering an experience that we care about. We've heard "making available to governments", for example.
>>> 2) This was previously a permitted use, which meant that the general restrictions on permitted uses applied (you have to justify what you keep and how long you keep it).  Moving it "out of scope" lifts those restrictions.
>>> 3) Contextual customization is a completely different question, nothing to do with raw data retention.
>>> 
>>> I note Issue-134 is linked to this text.
>>> 
>>> Proposals
>>> 
>>> 1) Make it a 'permitted use'
>>> 2) define it as 'Raw data may be collected and retained solely for the purpose of processing that data into data allowed by other claimed permitted uses.'
>>> 3) Retain a short paragraph in the out=of-scope section that says "The use of data present in the transaction, as part of the processing of that transaction, is out of scope: for example, the contextual customization of ads shown as part of the same network interaction is not restricted by DNT: 1."
>>> 
>> 
>> Specific proposal for the permitted use language:
>> 
>> * * * * * *
>> 
>> Raw data may be collected and retained solely for the purposes of processing that data into one of:
>> 1) Data that is not tracking data, and is thus out of scope;
>> 2) Data that is tracking data, but for which consent was in effect at the time of collection;
>> 3) Data that is tracking data, but which is being retained under another permitted use that was claimed at the time of collection.
>> 
>> All other data MUST BE discarded at the time of processing.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> David Singer
>> Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
>