Re: Editorial Change - ISSUE-25 Proposed Text

Well, if Company.com was a 3rd party on Website.com, then if DNT:1 were enabled Company.com should not have been able to gather any data when I visited Website.com, right?

I'm  not sure I understand how the "concept" of context helps particularly.  I guess you're saying that when you are a 3rd party you are operating in the third party context.  When you become a 1st party, you are operating in the 1st party context.

If we agree that a party can be both a 1st party or a 3rd party -- but not at the same time -- then I don't see any functional difference between saying "you are a 1st party" vs. "you are operating in the 1st party context"

I just don't understand what's confusing about saying in this network interaction you are a 1st party.  Later you might say, in this interaction (for these reasons) you are a 3rd party.




On Oct 7, 2013, at 5:43 PM, David Wainberg <dwainberg@appnexus.com> wrote:

> Hi John,
> 
> The point is that it's confusing to talk about parties, since a party can be either 1st or 3rd depending on context. If Company.com has content on Website.com, it's a third party in that context. If a user visits Website.com and then later visits Company.com directly, Company.com is then a first party. But what about the data Company.com collected on Website.com when Company.com was a third party? 
> 
> The point is that the rules attach based on the context of collection and use, not on the ephemeral nature of a party. Therefore, that's how we should describe the rules, else we risk not saying what we mean, and we risk confusing implementers and users.
> 
> Does that make sense?
> 
> -David
> 
> On 2013-10-07 3:41 PM, John Simpson wrote:
>> Hi David,
>> 
>> I'm having trouble understanding the distinction you are trying to make.  Doesn't a 3rd party collect in a 3rd party context?
>> 
>> Could you please explain a little more what you mean?
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> John
>> 
>> On Oct 7, 2013, at 8:44 AM, David Wainberg <dwainberg@appnexus.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Again, this is a case where talking about audience measurement data collected in a 3rd party context might be clearer than talking about parties
>> 
>