Geolocation ISSUE-202

On the call this week, we discussed the geolocation compliance provisions that are currently in the TCS.

I know that some folks have objected to this language for a while, and there's an argument that this provision makes less sense given the definition of tracking that we have adopted.  If DNT:1 means don't collect data about me across contexts, why should third-parties have to limit ephemeral contextual use of geolocation information?

No one on the call supported retaining the geolocation provision, though David Singer proposed adding non-normative language (perhaps to the deidentification section or after the definition of tracking) noting that precise geolocation information can be uniquely identifying over time.  These proposals are referenced in the wiki:

If anyone wants to argue in favor of retaining the existing substantive restriction, please make a case for it; otherwise, I'm inclined to remove it because of the objections we heard on Wednesday (and previously).

Received on Friday, 9 May 2014 13:35:35 UTC