Re: ACTION-69: Renaming ISSUE-54

I agree with Jonathan that would make sense to separate these issues.


On Feb 8, 2012, at 8:34 AM, Jonathan Robert Mayer wrote:

> In the interest of clarity, I recommend we make two ISSUEs from ISSUE-54.
> 
> 1) What can a first party do on its own website with provided information? I completely agree with Shane that this falls into the current first party proposal, and I expect we'll get consensus and close the ISSUE quickly.
> 
> 2) What can a first party do with submitted information when it's a third party? We've already heard a range of views on this; I expect lengthy discussion and perspectives from many stakeholders before we close the ISSUE.
> 
> On Feb 8, 2012, at 7:20 AM, Justin Brookman <justin@cdt.org> wrote:
> 
>> I think Sean's restatement of the issue is a bit ambiguous.  The key question is not whether a first party can alter its own websites and advertising on those sites based on data it collected as a first party.  It's about whether they can then leverage that data when     they're in a third-party environment.
>> 
>> I was tasked with writing up language on this in Brussels, but upon reflection, my vision is already allowed for in the text:  a third-party may customize content or advertising on other sites based on data it had collected as a first-party.  Thus, Yahoo! can serve ads on the New York Times based on what I had done on the Yahoo! site (or registration information I had provided to Yahoo!) and Facebook can tell me what my friends like in a social widget when I go to the WashingtonPost.com --- as long as neither collects the fact that I went to NYT or WaPo (apart from exceptions like ad reporting, fraud, analytics) and certainly does not add that information to a profile about me.  The language in the draft currently allows for this.  However, I will try to put together some non-normative language on this today to make it clear.  I have heard the argument that this unduly favors first-party sites who have a lot of user data, but I also think the privacy implications are dramatically reduced when ads are influenced based on data that a party already has about you.
>> 
>> Shane, you had seemed to disagree with this idea in Brussels, so if you want to put forward a countersuggestion that's fine.  Alternatively, Tom had disagreed on one of the calls that Facebook should be allowed to personalize content based on data it had     collected as a first-party, so he may want to proffer another suggestion.  I could see a stronger argument against allowing Yahoo!     to use passively-collected data about what I read on the Yahoo! site rather than using affirmatively provided info, but I personally wouldn't draw the line there.  It's also possible this issue is currently being discussed elsewhere on the mailing list, but I have not remotely been able to keep up.
>> Justin Brookman
>> Director, Consumer Privacy
>> Center for Democracy & Technology
>> 1634 I Street NW, Suite 1100
>> Washington, DC 20006
>> tel 202.407.8812
>> fax 202.637.0969
>> justin@cdt.org
>> http://www.cdt.org
>> @CenDemTech
>> @JustinBrookman
>> 
>> On 2/6/2012 10:10 AM, Shane Wiley wrote:
>>> 
>>> And the proposed answer, “YES”, as this appears to capture the 1st party exception cleanly and we have other statements that disallow a 1st party from sharing information with 3rd parties when DNT:1.
>>>  
>>> - Shane
>>>  
>>> From: Sean Harvey [mailto:sharvey@google.com] 
>>> Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2012 5:27 PM
>>> To: public-tracking@w3.org Group WG
>>> Subject: ACTION-69: Renaming ISSUE-54
>>>  
>>> Hi all, apologies for the delay in submitting my action item. 
>>>  
>>> ISSUE-54 is intended to get at the question of whether or not a first party is allowed to leverage their own data, including registration data provided by the user at a previous time, in the context of a DNT header being ON. 
>>>  
>>> Keep in mind I am not intending to provide an answer, only to more appropriately rename the topic. 
>>>  
>>> In light of this I propose the Issue be renamed: 
>>>  
>>> "Can first parties customize their own websites or advertising based on their own user data when a DNT header is ON?"
>>>  

----------
John M. Simpson
Consumer Advocate
Consumer Watchdog
1750 Ocean Park Blvd. ,Suite 200
Santa Monica, CA,90405
Tel: 310-392-7041
Cell: 310-292-1902
www.ConsumerWatchdog.org
john@consumerwatchdog.org