- From: Walter van Holst <walter.van.holst@xs4all.nl>
- Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 18:52:47 +0200
- To: public-tracking@w3.org
On 21/04/2014 22:01, Rob van Eijk wrote: > > A user's and regulators expectation is that DNT "should opt out of > collection of behavioral data for all purposes other than > those that would be consistent with the context of > the interaction; DNT should be comprehensive, effective, and > enforceable. It should (...) not permit technical loopholes." (cf. > FTC) > > The D-response with an standard explenation in the privacy policy is a > techical loophole in the standard. It reduces user transparancy and > damages user control. Moreover, it allows for discrimition based on the > judgement of a server of the correctness of the implementation in the > user agent. That judgement should not be made on the back of the user > while he is using the Web. > > Pleae correct me if I am wrong, but isn't it fair to say that the > company making such a judgement should not have the user pay for this > judgement, but instead engage with the company who is resonsible for the > user agent, and/or file a complaint with the regulator or competent > authority? > Not only that, I would consider it a deceptive marketing tactic to claim to honour DNT and subsequently disregard signals based on UA. Regards, Walter
Received on Wednesday, 30 April 2014 16:53:15 UTC