pmrm — archive

[Michael Willett]

Title: EPiServer CMS Mail Template FYI: PMRMers – Setback for Do Not Track. The snag still centers around the unresolved issue(s) stated in the draft doc: “ The WG has not come to consensus regarding the definition of tracking and the scope of DNT ” Privacy advocates versus the DAA. Michael …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. This e-mail was sent to you being a member of our e-mail list. Click here to unsubscribe . Click here to view the email in your browser International e-news October 14, 2013 Dear Willett Future of W3C Do-Not-Track in doubt W3C's (World Wide Web Consortium) working group on a US self-regulatory Do-Not-Track standard may stop its work as it has not been able to make much progress. At a vote, organised between 18 September and 9 October, a small majority of the 43 respondents said they would like to continue work in some form, but nearly half said they had no confidence in the process.  Another 66 participants failed to vote. The Digital Advertising Alliance (DAA) has now declared that it will leave the group and intends to convene a new group to work on the browser-based solution. W3C Working Group Co-chair, Justin Brookman, said: "If the group makes the decision to disband, we are likely to see an escalation in tactics by regulators, browser and operating systems vendors, consumer groups, and online third parties to either limit or harden online tracking capabilities. Do-Not-Track seems like a considerably more desirable outcome for all involved than blanket third-party resource blocking, invisible browser fingerprinting techniques that users cannot detect or control, or hastily enacted and possibly contradictory legislation in multiple jurisdictions. While the DAA has recently announced its own intent to work on Do-Not-Track like technologies, that effort has not even begun, while the W3C has already invested years of work into generating a transparent and open standard." DAA's Managing Director Lou Mastria said: "By Wednesday afternoon, votes were running half and half to discontinue the tracking protection working group, which has very little to show after two years of meetings." In the summer, DAA's Do-Not-Track proposal was rejected by the W3C that is seeking to design a solution that would let users block online "tracking" at browser level.  According to DAA, the W3C proposal, put forward in June, was too stringent.  While some web browsers already operate a Do-Not-Track feature, this does not have much relevance before websites specifically change their practices. DAA has previously said that setting Do-Not Track as a default option, to automatically make choices for consumers, does not increase transparency. See http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/ Details of the public vote are at https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/49311/tpwg-poll/results PL&B Reports PL&B International and UK Reports provide comprehensive news, analysis and best practice advice on data protection and privacy law compliance. As well as 6 new issues of each report per year subscriptions now also include access to: back issues; special reports; events documentation and much more. Click here for more information Click here to view sample reports The contents of the latest issues can be seen below. Recruitment Service: Data Protection Lawyer-Perm-Herts Senior Director Global Data Privacy-Perm-Europe Click here for more information Diary Dates PL&B's 27th Annual International Conference 30 June - 2 July 2014 Cambridge, UK International Report Issue 125, October 2013 ISSN 2046-844X Includes: Singapore prepares to apply and enforce Personal DP Act US Safe Harbor at risk from NSA storm DPA's seek more cooperation New blog on DP in Latin America German DPAs halt approval for new data transfers outside EU Data Breach rules for EU telcos South Africa passes Data Protection Bill Ukraine changes its DP law W3C rejects industry's Do-Not-Track Google to encrypt cloud data CEDPO calls for incentives to appoint DPOs European Class Action? EDPS concerned over EU cyber security proposal CPDP research award Canadian DPAs press for stronger privacy laws British Columbia promotes open government Global Internet privacy sweep Revised OECD Privacy Guidelines Privacy by default principle Asian Privacy Scholars in Hong Kong Search engine results: Personal data? US patchwork of social media laws China's incremental data privacy law Vietnam's 2013 e-commerce Decree Bahamas' new DP Commissioner Room for negotiation with Spain's new sanctions policy UK Report Issue 69, September 13 ISSN 2047-1459 Includes: SAR guidance is welcome but issues remain unresolved Data Breaches - can you afford them? ICO wrong to impose data breach fine What's new on the EU DP draft Regulation Sony agrees to pay ICO fine Guernsey approves image rights registration Privy Council to consider proposed press charter Anonymisation network launched ICO issues SAR undertaking Law Commission starts data sharing consultation Telecoms data breach rules in force CCTV code of practice issued It's a jungle, but DP Act applies on social networks and forums A pro-active approach to Privacy by Design brings results in NHS Cyber Incident Planning: Prepare for the worst The cloud poses challenges over and above regular outsourcing Freedom of information: Re-use of datasets poses potentially onerous obligations FOIA datasets code of practice ICO consults on PIA code Council pay data to be released Pivot table publication leads to a fine Copyright Privacy Laws & Business 2013 Privacy Laws & Business, 2nd Floor, Monument House, 215 Marsh Road, Pinner, Middlesex, HA5 5NE, United Kingdom Tel: +(44) 20 8868 9200, Fax: +(44) 20 8868 5215, Email: info@privacylaws.com ****************************************** This document should be read only by those persons to whom it is addressed. Its contents are private and confidential.  If you receive this email message in error, notify the sender immediately and do not disclose, copy or distribute this message, or open any attachments. PL&B monitors e-mails to ensure its systems operate effectively and to minimise the risk of viruses. Whilst it has taken reasonable steps to scan this email, it does not accept liability for any virus that may be contained in it. ******************************************