ISSUE-216: Does “Contractual relationships and branding” provide an equal level of privacy controls as “ownership and branding” in the context of DNT?

Contracts and Branding

Does “Contractual relationships and branding” provide an equal level of privacy controls as “ownership and branding” in the context of DNT?

State:
CLOSED
Product:
Compliance Current
Raised by:
Alan Chapell
Opened on:
2013-10-01
Description:
I believe that we have WG consensus that common ownership, control and branding provides sufficient transparency and privacy controls. Building on some of David Wainberg’s recent posts, I believe that branding and contractual provisions provide an equivalent level of transparency and control.
Related Actions Items:
No related actions
Related emails:
  1. Batch closing of TCS issues (from jbrookman@cdt.org on 2014-09-10)
  2. tracking-ISSUE-216 (Contracts and Branding): Does “Contractual relationships and branding” provide an equal level of privacy controls as “ownership and branding” in the context of DNT? [Compliance Current] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2013-10-01)

Related notes:

This proposal was rejected by the working group in determining the definition of party. -Justin

Justin Brookman, 19 Nov 2014, 06:29:15

This proposal was rejected by the working group in determining the definition of party. -Justin

Justin Brookman, 19 Nov 2014, 06:29:36

Closed per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2014Sep/0023.html

Justin Brookman, 25 Feb 2015, 03:50:16

Display change log ATOM feed


Matthias Schunter <matthias.schunter@intel.com>, Chair, Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>, Staff Contact
Tracker: documentation, (configuration for this group), originally developed by Dean Jackson, is developed and maintained by the Systems Team <w3t-sys@w3.org>.
$Id: index.php,v 1.325 2014-09-10 21:42:02 ted Exp $