Online Privacy News and Views
We are delighted to announce that we will be sponsoring a seminar being held by the ICC UK to mark the launch of the second edition of their guide to cookies.
The Article 29 Working Party (WP29) - an EU advisory body made up of the different national data protection regulators, has published an important new opinion this week on the definition of personal data - which could just reaslise the worst fears of the online advertising world.
In the last few weeks, the tensions around the agreement of a Do Not Track (DNT) standard have heightened considerably, and there appears to be a real risk of the whole initiative becoming meaningless.
Privacy International is a leading pressure group for better privacy rights for individuals. They have recently published their analysis of the proposed new EU Data Protection Regulation currently undergoing scrutiny.
A few weeks ago, I mentioned that Microsoft will be releasing Internet Explorer 10 with Do Not Track (DNT) switched on in the express installation option. I noted at the time that this one action would suddenly make DNT much more important.
Publishers, Advertisers, Designers and Developers have all got their own reasons for not liking the law. And in the last few days the 'we hate the cookie law' and 'get rid of the cookie law' have had quite a lot of success in getting their message across.
Our blog post title today is taken from the title of a new research paper published in Harvard Law and Policy Review. In it, the authors present detailed findings on the uses of tracking technologies by online advertising companies.
The Optanon Cookie Auditor has this week been published to the Chrome Web Store.
In the last few months, the different EU member states have been sending their feedback to the European Commission on the proposed new Data Protection Regulation, designed to replace current EU Data Protection legislation.
The ICO came under fire recently when a publicised Freedom of Information request published by PC Pro claimed their response as evidence that they are not properly prepared to enforce the cookie law.