decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
DNT Logic | 751 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
P&G, Walmart, Coke And 30 Other Huge Advertisers Just Humiliated Microsoft
Authored by: designerfx on Wednesday, October 03 2012 @ 01:51 PM EDT
probably the only time I would say MS is potentially doing
something right. Every one of these advertisers is who is
being humiliated if you ask me - this is saying "we all pay MS
- we are the unidentified third parties with which all of your
information is being shared".

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

So why dont i get windows free then
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2012 @ 02:54 PM EDT
if they want to do this give us the operating system freely
and then go ahead do all this stupid stuff....

( then runs to linux and laughs oh ya this is why )

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

P&G, Walmart, Coke And 30 Other Huge Advertisers Just Humiliated Microsoft
Authored by: albert on Wednesday, October 03 2012 @ 03:04 PM EDT
The leopard doesn't change his spots, but this is so unlike MS that it beggars
disbelief. It must be a mistake. The only reason I can think of is complaints
from corporate _users_ of MS systems, who don't want their employees deluged
with ads.

I apologize in advance for trying to use logic here.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

P&G, Walmart, Coke &c. just display their ignorance
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2012 @ 03:13 PM EDT
Isn't the whole point of the IE10 DNT that it violates web standards
and promotes the unpromotable? If an advertiser's website ignores
the DNT header the browser sends, it's business as usual, and there's
diddly squat MS or the luser can do about it. Apache are already
on record as saying their web server will by default ignore MS DNT.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

P&G, Walmart, Over reaction?
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2012 @ 04:03 PM EDT
We have been tracked by credit card purchased for decades. The internet just
made it easier for them to collate the data. Then there are the coupons by
which the sellers give you a little something back for sharing your shipping
preferences.

What concerns people is the potential to use online shopping history to set
pricing. If you are more likely to buy a product then you are not enticed by
sales offers. If you are less likely to buy then you are offered a lower price.
Sounds like haggling except you aren't engaging a human sales clerk, you are
engaging a cold calculating computer network.

There is nothing immoral in what these online merchants are doing. It is not a
violation of your privacy if they combine their transaction data. You can
always choose not to do business with them.

I suppose that in the long run these merchants will be answered with personal
purchase agents of some kind. If your purchases are done through some bulk
purchase agency like an online Costco but one that hides your particular choices
from the suppliers then their ability to use your online purchase patterns can
be mitigated.

The legislature wants a reason to justify strong government control over the
Internet and even more taxation. They are always looking for ways to increase
power, control, and influence. This false privacy issue is asking the
government to step in and protect a right that we do not actually have.

Legislation and law suits are not the answer. Technology enabled this data
collection. Technology needs to be used to counter it. Merchants have the
right to use the information that you voluntarily provide them. You have the
right to use third parties to obscure this information.

Of course you could always use cash at you local shopping center but that's an
extreme solution.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

DNT Logic
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 03 2012 @ 05:04 PM EDT
Would not a setting of Do Not Track to FALSE mean track the user activity and
TRUE means turn it off.

It wouldn't be the first time the setting of a flag was confused with the action
it triggered.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

The Apache viewpoint on this - MS is not being the good guy
Authored by: bugstomper on Wednesday, October 03 2012 @ 05:56 PM EDT
It isn't as simple as Microsoft standing up for the users. The statement from
the Apache developer who patched the Apache web server to counter this move by
MS in IE10 says that Do Not Track is a standard that specifies that the DNT
setting being on or off MUST indicate an active choice by a human user that may
be voluntarily honored by the web server. It works to the degree that
advertisers can be convinced to turn off tracking for people who care enough to
request it. The incentives for advertisers to honor the flag fail if the browser
does not conform to the standards and advertisers cannot treat a DNL flag as an
informed choice.

As Apache said, Microsoft is a member of the standards group that came up with
this, they could have pushed for a different standard, and they didn't. Instead
they now once again break standards.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )