RE: Audience Measurement Permitted Use (ISSUE-25)

The problem with audience measurement has been that it does not provide 
an opt-out.
Add a permitted use under DNT leaves users empty handed.

For me a permitted use is therefore, how carefully crafted it may be, at 
the moment a bridge too far.

I therefore respectfully reqeust a if we get to a CFO on this issue, to 
include an option to NOT include a permitted use for audience 
measurement.

If new arguments for strengthening the user's position exist, e.g. an 
innovative opt-out system, please put those forward, so that we can 
discuss these.

Rob

Shane M Wiley schreef op 2014-09-11 12:39:
> We should agree to disagree then as the same statement could be added
> to every single provision of the document.  Wasteful...
> 
> - Shane
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Walter van Holst [mailto:walter.van.holst@xs4all.nl]
> Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2014 3:34 AM
> To: public-tracking@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Audience Measurement Permitted Use (ISSUE-25)
> 
> On 2014-09-11 12:20, Shane M Wiley wrote:
> 
>> I believe we already have a broad statement (which some believe is
>> unnecessary) that states nothing in the TCS is meant to contradict
>> local laws.  Adding another non-normative statement to this FACT is
>> wasteful and unnecessary.
> 
> I disagree. We have such a broad statement since the group has chosen
> not to harmonise at the level of protection of the vast majority of
> the industrialised world as well since it is not feasible to check
> every bit of the compliance specification with every jurisdiction on
> the planet.
> Having that statement does not take away from the utility of pointing
> out that a specific permitted use is not a permitted use in the
> context of the jurisdiction of one of the largest economies when we
> already know it doesn't. That is not wasteful, that is helpful.
> 
> Regards,
> 
>   Walter

Received on Thursday, 11 September 2014 16:03:13 UTC