Page Comparison

From 2018-11-08 call:

From 2018-11-01 call:

Andrew led the group through a discussion looking at the central 'agreement' between data subject and data controller in light of basic concepts of Contract Law in the Common Law to see what patterns and insights are available

From 2018-10-04 call:

• If the legitimate basis is not 'explicit consent' - but rather legitimate interest, is the concept of 'data receipt' still viable?
• Mark - yes, the current CR was designed to be not confined to 'explicit consent' - so yes, the receipt concept will work for other bases for processing
  • in particular - for updates to privacy notices
• Mark Q: would it be interesting to have additional values for the 'consent type' field? A: YES! 
  • Jim: maybe this should go to the Consent Management WG?
• A lawyer at the Seattle event pointed out that it would be useful to capture the actual privacy notice that was agreed by the user.
  • OpenConsent has an alpha product that might suit the purpose
  • There is a systemic problem that needs to be addressed - and capturing the privacy notice won't actually help
  • If there is a strong need for a high value receipt, then it would be very useful to capture the actual notice text
  • So maybe the receipt could have optionality to allow for capture of the notice text.
• WG needs to take some time to discuss the UX - schedule it
  • Tom has posted some examples that could be discussed
  • Mark - OpenBanking has posted UX guidance
• Schedule specific multiple calls for this to discuss what the user should see, and how this translates into the 'receipt' concept
  • Should this WG do a spec or guidance on UX or UI?
  • Should this WG talk about what the 'receipt' means and / or represents?
  • (YES to both question)
• Andrew: suggests first design call on Thursday October 18, 2019 and then every 4 weeks to be kind to the down-under-ers.

Iain: the highest value work item is the lexicon work