Re: Issue-207

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.



Received on Wednesday, 30 April 2014 16:53:15 UTC