W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > June 2013

RE: issue-205

From: Shane Wiley <wileys@yahoo-inc.com>
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2013 16:01:07 +0000
To: "Mike O'Neill" <michael.oneill@baycloud.com>, "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>
CC: "'Justin Brookman'" <justin@cdt.org>, Nicholas Doty <npdoty@w3.org>
Message-ID: <DCCF036E573F0142BD90964789F720E3140E5E90@GQ1-MB01-02.y.corp.yahoo.com>

The term "implied by the decision" seems far too open to interpretation.  All 3rd parties could argue users have agreed to ignore DNT since it's implied they've consented by visiting the web page they're on (I don't agree with that stance but use it demonstrate how easy it is to apply the term "implied" in a given context).

- Shane

NOTE - on vacation this week so replies will be delayed.

From: Mike O'Neill [mailto:michael.oneill@baycloud.com]
Sent: Saturday, June 29, 2013 1:05 AM
To: public-tracking@w3.org
Cc: 'Justin Brookman'; Nicholas Doty
Subject: issue-205

I added the phrase about local law to Justin's text on the wiki, as per my change submission.

A user agent MUST have a default tracking preference of unset (not enabled) unless a specific tracking preference is implied by the decision to use that agent, or another default preference is required to comply with applicable laws, regulations and judicial processes.


The original wording in the TPE, allowing the choice of a privacy oriented user-agent, was better so why lose it, and it is possible that rights-based jurisdictions like the EU with an assumed right to privacy may require user-agents be supplied with DNT set by default.
Received on Sunday, 30 June 2013 16:02:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:45:13 UTC