Browser Sniffing and the Rush to Judgement
02.09.2011 - Krux Digital
Krux prides itself on maintaining the highest standards for consumer privacy. In our consumer privacy principles, we call out the following:
In all of our work, we will seek to maintain alignment with standards established by groups such as the IAB, NAI, and OPA. When we feel industry standards fall short, we will take all reasonable steps to ensure that our customers and consumers receive greater protection. Above all, our priorities are to advance the interests of publishers and consumers and to expose and correct bad data practices. By doing so, we will enable the industry to become a more responsible steward of audience data.
In short, we’re committed to calling out bad actors and exposing the nefarious sh*t that sometimes happens as “standard practice” in online tracking today.
While there are many issues at play with the inappropriate uses of flash cookies and history/browser sniffing brouhaha, it certainly begs more attention. There is an interesting article today on the law.com. Read it. You’ll surely be seeing more as this plays out – from the steps of the courthouse to the steps of the Capitol building.
History sniffing is now the centerpiece of a growing number of consumer class action lawsuits against name-brand companies seeking unspecified damages arising from invasion of privacy, common law tort claims, and statutory violations. And these history-sniffing actions and resulting lawsuits have attracted attention from other class action lawyers, academic researchers, investigative journalists, and federal regulators.