Hi,
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 02:24:02PM -0600, Aaron Halfaker wrote:
Do Not Track is a technology and policy proposal that enables users to opt out of *tracking by websites they do not visit*, [...]
Do not track is explicitly for third party tracking. We are merely proposing to count those people who do access our sites.
The first/third party distinction and expemptions are clearly cut in technical documents (although along different lines in different commentaries). However, from my point of view, this distinction ignores real-life users.
I for one don't want to spend half an hour to figure out which parts of a page are first/third party. I'd just expect the gathering/using of data to stop altogether.
And according to [1], I am not the only user who feels this way:
Preliminary results suggest that users do not share nearly so nuanced view of tracking, but rather simply expect data collection and use to cease when they click a Do Not Track button.
One can always do better than the minimum requirements of a standard. For DNT, one can always choose to interpret it in a more restrictive way and thereby move closer to the expectation of the users of the above study.
Have fun, Christian
[1] A. M. McDonald and J. M. Peha, "Track Gap: Policy Implications of User Expectations for the `Do Not Track' Internet Privacy Feature," 39th Telecommunications Policy Research Conference (TPRC), 2011.