[294] in Privacy_Forum
[ PRIVACY Forum ] Not on Track with "Do Not Track"
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (privacy@vortex.com)
Thu Nov 1 00:02:46 2007
Message-Id: <200711010316.lA13GJkh007280@chrome.vortex.com>
To: privacy-list@vortex.com
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 20:16:19 -0700
From: privacy@vortex.com
Reply-To: PRIVACY Forum Digest mailing list <privacy@vortex.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Errors-To: privacy-bounces+privacy-forum=mit.edu@vortex.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Not on Track with "Do Not Track"
http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000326.html
Greetings. Several groups have just proposed to the FTC that a
"Do Not Track" Internet list be created, somewhat in the vein of the
"Do Not Call" phone solicitation "block" list
( http://tinyurl.com/2l6byw ).
While it's way too early at this stage to make definitive statements
about the details of such a concept, you might be surprised to hear
that my initial reaction to the idea is running significantly toward
the negative.
Given my long-standing concerns regarding what I call "data creep"
and diffusion of collected user transactional data into increasingly
disparate "domains" of use, one might expect me to be enthusiastic
about such a list. I'm not.
I'll have lots more to say about this if the plan seems to gather
any traction, but my gut feeling is that the concept is ripe both
for the "be careful what you wish for" and the "law of unintended
consequences" booby prizes.
I touched on some of this back in September in "Blocking Web Ads --
And Paying the Piper" ( http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000281.html ),
to the extent that if we're really ready to fundamentally
restrict the advertising basis of most Web services today, we'd
better be ready to pony up the bucks to pay for Internet-based
services that we now get for free. I'm not convinced that most
people really want to go in that direction. I know that I don't.
Behavioral tracking can definitely be abused. But frankly, the
concept of a massive government-mandated opt-out list applied to
that space gives me cold shivers. I can offhand think of a bunch of
ways that such a plan -- for a variety of technical reasons -- could
essentially blow up and make matters far worse rather than better,
and that's not even taking into account the potentially derailed
business models, resulting realignments, and out-of-pocket payments
that would newly become the burden of consumers.
Perhaps the push for "Do Not Track" will serve as a wake-up call for
Internet firms, reminding them that they need to be more proactive
in terms of self-limiting their collection and use of such data --
to applications that will not be perceived as abusive -- or else
risk the government moving in and throwing a massive monkey-wrench
into their operations.
Overall, I'd much rather see the industry seriously self-regulate
this area, because all else being equal -- to horribly mangle a
classic movie line -- "We don't need more stinkin' lists!"
And that's the truth.
--Lauren--
Lauren Weinstein
lauren@vortex.com or lauren@pfir.org
Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800
http://www.pfir.org/lauren
Co-Founder, PFIR
- People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org
Founder, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com
Member, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com
_______________________________________________
privacy mailing list
http://lists.vortex.com/mailman/listinfo/privacy
