Re: New text Issue 25: Aggregated data: collection and use for audience measurement research

My understanding has always been that other opt-out regimes would be unnecessary once we had a meaningful DNT standard in place. DNT is supposed to be a simple and persistent way to signal a user's preference.  One problem with current opt-outs is that they are not persistent.  Clear your cookies  and you're no longer opted out.


On Mar 20, 2013, at 12:56 PM, JC Cannon <jccannon@microsoft.com> wrote:

> Is one to infer that once deployed DNT will replace current opt-out regimes?
>  
> JC
>  
> From: Justin Brookman [mailto:justin@cdt.org] 
> Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 8:58 AM
> To: public-tracking@w3.org
> Subject: Re: New text Issue 25: Aggregated data: collection and use for audience measurement research
>  
> DNT is intended to operate as one global opt-out.  This standard will not be effective if DNT because a very narrow opt-out for some purposes, and you need to separately go to the DAA page to opt out of behavioral advertising, and later to the ESOMAR page to opt out of market research.  (And even then, both those opt-outs will suffer from the same problems we have today that DNT was designed to solve --- lack of comprehensiveness and impermanence.)
> 
> Justin Brookman
> Director, Consumer Privacy
> Center for Democracy & Technology
> tel 202.407.8812
> justin@cdt.org
> http://www.cdt.org
> @JustinBrookman
> @CenDemTech
> On 3/20/2013 11:38 AM, Kathy Joe wrote:
> Hi Rigo,
> Yes as signaled by this text:  
>  In addition, the third party must be subject to an independent certification process under the oversight of a generally-accepted market research industry organization that maintains a web platform providing user information about audience measurement research. This web platform lists the parties eligible to collect information under DNT standards and the audience measurement research permitted use and it provides users with an opportunity to exclude their data contribution
> Kathy  
>   
> .From: Rigo Wenning [mailto:rigo@w3.org]
> To: public-tracking@w3.org
> Cc: Kathy Joe [mailto:kathy@esomar.org]
> Sent: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 16:33:13 +0100
> Subject: Re: New text Issue 25: Aggregated data: collection and use for audience measurement research
> 
> Katy, 
> 
> in your suggested system, how could I signal to the audience measurement 
> system that for some valid reason (looking at medical data), I don't 
> want to be calibrated for the next 5 clicks? Is there an opt-out?
> 
> --Rigo
> 
> On Tuesday 19 March 2013 17:00:01 Kathy Joe wrote:
> > Here is a revised text for Issue 25 redrafted to take into account
> > various comments on the previous draft.
> 
> 
>