RE: ISSUE-184

Under DNT, third parties are not allowed to collect data for targeting purposes or share data with third parties so any third-party data used by the first party would have only been collected when DNT was disabled or absent.

JC

-----Original Message-----
From: Walter van Holst [mailto:walter.van.holst@xs4all.nl] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 12:06 PM
To: public-tracking@w3.org
Subject: Re: ISSUE-184

On 225//13 8:51 PM, Chris Pedigo wrote:
> I thought Issue 184 was about whether a site can condition access to 
> the site on whether the user grants consent to override DNT. Walter, 
> I'm not sure how your proposed text would address that.  Are you 
> solving for a different problem?

Dear Chris,

I am not sure how the text at
http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/184 could be interpreted that way.

Having said that, as far as I am aware there is a rough consensus in this group that as a rule of thumb a site (meaning a first-party in the lingo of the spec) can require personal data in return for access to its content. By and large (there are quite enough edge cases about which we could argue endlessly) even a privacy advocate such as myself is not very uncomfortable with that position.

Either way, ISSUE-184 is about a site claiming DNT-compliance while still effectively forcing users to be tracked. So an opposite case: a website that advertising through the DNT mechanism that it will not track while at the same time effectively forcing users to be tracked, but by third-parties. That reeks of false advertising to me.

Regards,

 Walter

Received on Wednesday, 22 May 2013 19:21:16 UTC