uk-netmarketing Archive (2011-2015)

Sorry to jump in with only something silly to add but I liked the statement
one of my clients opted to add to their cookie policy-

http://www.thedogsdoodahs.com/cookies.aspx

-
*Does this all sound scary and a load of gobbledegook? *
We agree. The reason why we have some much information on cookies is
because the bigwigs in some high up place decided all websites should have
a ‘cookie statement’, we were pretty tempted to put up a big picture of
Cookie Monster and make some crunch-crunch noises. Thing is, whilst we’re
much happier getting on with the business of creating funny personalised
cards, sometimes you have to just give in and do what the law says you have
to do. So, we have cookies- we don’t know how a website would work properly
without them really. They are little techy things which do pretty much no
harm (they don’t store anything apart from random bits of text). You could
cover your grandmother in them and she wouldn’t bat an eyelid. The monkeys
in the tech room rely on them so they can show us pretty graphs about how
many of you have visited from East Anglia or whatever and the boss likes to
be sure we can say hello when you login (how rude not to!). That’s about it
really.
-

Made me giggle anyway.

Alex Sass

On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 10:40 PM, <jclarke at ic24.net> wrote:

> Mark, I'm against the law, it's unworkable and not clear enough, nor is
> the advice by the ICO or others like the IAB any use at all.
>
> I will say though, I for one don't want behavioural and re-targeted ads
> served to me, but that's not a cookie issue, it's more a way of discovering
> new things and making my own mind up instead of being nagged and an
> advertiser thinking they know what I think/like/desire etc 24/7. From a
> professional point of view - for years I've had vendors selling me all the
> whizzy targeting software yet for all their optimisation promises I see
> hardly any greater rise in CTR ore uplift. I've seen greater conversion and
> numbers from better creative and more dynamic ad units, so that's what I
> prefer for my clients.
>
> When I'm happily being annonymous I turn off my cookies and see a
> refreshing new world :-)
>
> Cheers
>
> Jon Clarke
>
> Head of Digital
>
> Space & Time Media
>
>
>
> On May 24 2012, mark lesbirel wrote:
>
> Hello Chinwaggers
>
> This is a bit of a rant, so please excuse and as ever, I bow to the
> cleverer
> and more technical (and legal) peeps.
>
> I know we¹ll have to comply with this ­ but I am not really sure what this
> is for (I mean the law in the first place not compliance with it ;)
>
> I know this is supposed to be about Œprotecting the consumer¹ - but really?
>
> Is it just a political solution to keep the corridors of power busy and in
> vote for me mode.
>
> It¹s not at all like an MOT or insurance. MOT makes sure your car is not
> dangerous, and insurance makes sure you can pay damage you cause (even if
> not by fault) so third parties don¹t loose out.
>
> No one will die visiting a website. Although I have thought a few times
> about ending my life navigating around or waiting for some ­ but that¹s
> another matter.
>
> Why, as a consumer, would you not want ads that were targeted? What is the
> point of ads that are not relevant (and I mean from the consumers point of
> view) - I¹d rather see an ad for something I might buy than something I
> would not.
>
> Why would you not want the website to work properly?
>
> If you don¹t like cookies can¹t you disable them or up security in your
> browser? Even, not visit the site in the first place.
>
> I suppose the next step will be a warning on all emails that have tracking
> (ie all broadcast emails)...
>
> Up the revolution.
>
>
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> On 22/05/2012 14:29, "jclarke at ic24.net" wrote:
>
> > I'll keep adding more links in there, but please everyone do add your
> links
> > and thoughts on there - it's getting some great eyeballs on it.
> >
> > www.mediastarz.co.uk/forum/topics/advice-on-website-cookie-law and
> there is
> > also a page with a petition against teh law here at
> > mediastarz.co.uk/profiles/blogs/stop-the-eu-s-legal-war-on-web-cookies
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> >
> > Jon
> >
> >
> > On May 22 2012, Angus Phillipson wrote:
> >
> > Super useful, thanks Jon!
> >
> >
> >
> > Was just reading the econsultancy best practice guide too, which is worth
> > a look and has some good practical guidance to recommend.
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards
> >
> >
> >
> > angus
> >
> >
> >
> > *From:* uk-netmarketing-bounces at mm.chinwag.com [mailto:
> > uk-netmarketing-bounces at mm.chinwag.com] *On Behalf Of *jclarke at ic24.net
> > *Sent:* 17 May 2012 16:52
> > *To:* uk-netmarketing
> > *Subject:* Re: [uk-netmarketing] European Cookie Law - Big Debate - we
> need
> > a solution for all
> >
> >
> >
> > I've collated all the news I can find, plus those who have spoken at
> > seminars and even sites that have attempted to implement a cookie button
> > etc on them all here at
> >
> > www.mediastarz.co.uk/forum/topics/advice-on-website-cookie-law and
> there is
> > also a page with a petition against teh law here at
> > mediastarz.co.uk/profiles/blogs/stop-the-eu-s-legal-war-on-web-cookies
> >
> > Still so much confusion - the last story added today via the BBC takes
> the
> > biscuit ... no not the cookie
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Jon Clarke
> >
> > Head of Digital
> >
> > Space & Time Media
> >
> > www.spaceandtime.eu.com
> >
> > jon at spaceandtime.eu.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mar 3 2012, Sam Michel wrote:
> >
> > Hi Dan,
> >
> > The implications are scary, the only positive thing is that there's
> > awareness that something needs to be sorted out. When I wrote up Vicky's
> > results as a blog post, it became the highest traffic blog post on
> Chinwag
> > ever:
> >
> >
> http://chinwag.com/blogs/sam-michel/cookiepocalypse-implementing-new-law-drops
> > -use-90
> >
> > My favourite implementation so far, is the one AllThingsD are using:
> >
> > http://allthingsd.com (wait a few mins for the yellow box to appear at
> the
> > top of the page)
> >
> > Not sure if it's pass muster with the ICO/EU legal folks though. I have a
> > feeling this is going to run and run, especially as the tech giants are
> > scoring a spectacular number of own goals with the regulators:
> >
> > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17205754
> >
> > Toodle Pip
> >
> > Sam
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > Sam Michel, CEO - e: sam at chinwag.com
> > t: +44 (0)20 7183 2923 f: +44 (0)20 7099 4011
> > Chinwag - http://chinwag.com
> > Twitter - http://twitter.com/toodlepip
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------
> > - Social Media Week LDN 2012 (13-17 Feb) - http://chw.ag/smwldn
> > - Chinwag Jobs - http://jobs.chinwag.com
> > - Digital Missions - http://digital-mission.org
> > - Sam @ Chinwag: http://chinwag.com/blogs/sammichel
> > - Sam @ Toodlepip: http://www.toodlepip.co.uk
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> > On 2 March 2012 18:17, daniel barker wrote:
> >
> >> >
> >> > "we're recommending our clients do exactly what the DoI themselves are
> >> > doing in the banner at the top of this page - but make it look nicer.
> >> > Problem solved."
> >> >
> >> > It solves one 'legal' problem, but opens an enormous 'business'
> problem:
> >> > http://www.flickr.com/photos/vickyb/5859873960/
> >> >
> >> > That graph shows the 'tracked' visits to the ICO site following their
> >> > implementation of the 'cookie opt-in' banner.
> >> >
> >> > So, in summary, if you follow their implementation, it dramatically
> >> > impacts your ability to understand what visitors are doing on your
> site,
> >> > and thus to improve the site from either a business or a user
> perspective.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > dan
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > dan barker
> >> > http://www.barker.dj
> >> > http://www.linkedin.com/in/djbarker
> >> > +44 (0)7855 953 942
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Alec East wrote:
> >> >
> >>> >> The UK Cookie Law is actually very clear and always has been. All
> cookies
> >>> >> except those that are "essential to the core functions of a site"
> must
> > get
> >>> >> permission. Ther's no ambiguity or area for doubt because they have
> >>> >> clarified what "essential" means and it's things like shopping
> carts,
> > bank
> >>> >> log-ins etc but not Analytics, Banner syndication, affiliate
> programs,
> >>> >> Facebook Like buttons, etc. etc, so, if you want to use them and
> they set
> >>> >> a cookie, you have to get the visitor's permission first (then set a
> > cookie
> >>> >> to say you have it).
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Cookies from third-party sites such as Google Analytics or
> advertising,
> >>> >> HTML5 local storage and Flash cookies / Local Shared Objects all
> require
> >>> >> the user's explicit permission. So auditing your site is essential.
> It's
> >>> >> not hard and there are plenty of tools out there or you can always
> ask an
> >>> >> experienced agency to do it for you. They may even suggest changes
> to
> > your
> >>> >> code that will avoid setting non-essential cookies in the first
> place.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> If you're running a site based on Wordpress or Drupal or some other
> >>> >> plug-in heavy CMS, the plugins may set cookies too.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> How you handle getting permission is up to you but we're
> recommending our
> >>> >> clients do exactly what the DoI themselves are doing in the banner
> at the
> >>> >> top of this page - but make it look nicer. Problem solved.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> http://www.ico.gov.uk/for_organisations/data_protection/notification.aspx
> >>> >>
> >>> >> A bit more info:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> http://www.out-law.com/page-5486
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Al
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Alec East Director
> >>> >>
> >>> >> email: alec.east at thboom.com
> >>> >> mob: +44 (0)7976 751 371
> >>> >> web: *http:// www.thboom.com*
> >>> >> *
> >>> >> *
> >>> >> http://twitter.com/aleceast
> >>> >>
> >>> >> The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be
> >>> >> privileged. It is intended for the addressee only. If you are not
> the
> >>> >> intended recipient, please delete this e-mail and advise the sender
> >>> >> accordingly. The contents of this e-mail must not be disclosed or
> copied
> >>> >> without the sender's consent. Seeing as you've read this far, we'd
> like
> > to
> >>> >> compliment you on your attention to detail.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Message: 6
> >>> >> Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 14:48:28 +0000
> >>> >> From: daniel barker
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Subject: Re: [uk-netmarketing] European Cookie Law - Big Debate - we
> >>> >> need a solution for all
> >>> >> To: uk-netmarketing
> >>> >> Message-ID:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> hi, Jon, this is a great email and I agree entirely.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> The 'conflict' at the centre of this is that if you follow the
> > regulations
> >>> >> 'absolutely' it is very bad for business. I've run a few little
> polls
> >>> >> around this and - overwhelmingly - the response of marketers has
> been
> > that
> >>> >> they are planning to either A) Do nothing; or B) Wait and see what
> >>> >> everyone
> >>> >> else does & follow suit.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> The latest guidelines from the ICO were welcome, but no clearer
> than the
> >>> >> first. They essentially hinted (very, very paraphrased): "we'll
> turn a
> >>> >> blind eye to Google Analytics, though even that isn't strictly
> allowed
> >>> >> without prior consent". I thought that was sad, as they could have
> chosen
> >>> >> a
> >>> >> broader interpretation of 'strictly necessary' within the
> guidelines &
> >>> >> said
> >>> >> that they interpret anonymous web analytics tracking as 'strictly
> >>> >> necessary', and thus fully legal.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Here is my 'better than doing nothing at all' recommendation for
> sites
> > not
> >>> >> doing anything onerous:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> 1. Audit your own cookies, using the 'ghostery' plugin (or
> similar). If
> >>> >> you have a very, very large site with hundreds of different page
> >>> >> templates,
> >>> >> or you have budget to burn, use a third party company to do this.
> >>> >> 2. Add a line to the foot of every page on your site, saying "In
> order
> >>> >> to run this website we place essential cookies on your computer.
> See our
> >>> >> privacy policy for further information"
> >>> >> 3. Within your privacy policy, list all of the tracking cookies
> you're
> >>> >> placing, linking to vendors' sites for further info. (the Ghostery
> >>> >> plugin
> >>> >> gives you all of the links, etc you need to do this)
> >>> >> 4. If you have any type of user signup/checkout process, include a
> line
> >>> >> in the Ts & Cs stating that they agree for you to place cookies on
> their
> >>> >> machines.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> This doesn't - strictly speaking - satisfy the regulations, but it
> at
> >>> >> least
> >>> >> fits with their spirit, which is essentially to be as open &
> transparent
> >>> >> as
> >>> >> possible with your site's users. I therefore think it's better than
> doing
> >>> >> absolutely nothing (as most sites seem to be planning).
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> As Jon said - this is an important topic & it would be great for
> the IAB
> >>> >> (or similar) to weigh in a bit more heavily.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> dan
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> --
> >>> >> dan barker
> >>> >> http://www.barker.dj
> >>> >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/djbarker
> >>> >> +44 (0)7855 953 942
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 6:35 PM, wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> The EU Cookie Law gets tightened near the beginning of May and I
> wanted
> >>> >>
> >>> >> to see who else in community is looking at this and can share their
> >>> >>
> >>> >> thoughts and legal guidelines and solutions.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> How is one to get consent via tracking pixels from adverts?
> Re-targeting?
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> How does one deal with a person coming onto a site, saying they
> don't
> > want
> >>> >>
> >>> >> cookies and then what happens next time they come back. Cookie them
> so
> >>> >> they
> >>> >>
> >>> >> don't get the optin box? It's NUTS!
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I find that the more clients who ask and get their lawyers involved
> the
> >>> >>
> >>> >> more questions it raises and I can't just say 'Forget it' or 'Don't
> worry
> >>> >>
> >>> >> about it' , honestly I think it's madness yet how are we to deal
> with it
> >>> >>
> >>> >> and all the variances people seem to come up with?
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I really think this is the one and only time the IAB needs to stand
> up
> > and
> >>> >>
> >>> >> be counted and give all website publishers, owners, sales bodies
> etc in
> >>> >> the
> >>> >>
> >>> >> UK a definitive document on how to deal with this ill thought of
> law.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Please don't ignore this post, it could be the most important one
> you get
> >>> >>
> >>> >> all year.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Please add your solutions here and those digital lawyers here can
> you
> > give
> >>> >>
> >>> >> any clarity? IAB members too, please pitch in.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Kind regards
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Jon Clarke
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Head of Digital
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Space & Time Media
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >
> >
> > ~~ Chinwag Jobs: Find your perfect new job or next team member ~~
> >
> > Chinwag Jobs is the leading specialist recruitment website for digital
> > roles in the UK. Used by major companies such as BBC, Electronic
> > Arts, Kingston University as well as the majority of recruitment
> > agencies who place staff in the sector.
> >
> > Take a look through our listings or register to advertise your
> > own vacancies today.
> >
> >>> >> CHINWAG JOBS: http://jobs.chinwag.com
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > You're subscribed to uk-netmarketing to change your options or
> > unsubscribe: https://mm.chinwag.com/options/uk-netmarketing
> >
> > uk-netmarketing discussion list is powered by http://chinwag.com
>
> Mark Lesbirel
>
>
> DL +44 (0) 7973 622 969
> SKYPE creativematch
>
> T 0845 676 2250
> E mark.lesbirel at creativematch.co.uk
>
> http://www.creativematch.com
>
> Postal Address; 803 Andover House, George Yard, Andover, Hampshire SP10 1PB
> This e-mail and any attachments are for the intended addressee(s) only and
> may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you are not a named
> addressee, do not use, retain or disclose such information.
>
> This email is not guaranteed to be free from viruses and does not bind
> creativematch in any contract or obligation.
>
> Every effort is made to ensure that the information given herein is
> accurate, but no legal responsibility is accepted for any errors,
> omissions,
> or misleading statements in that information and no responsibility is
> accepted in regard to the standing of any firms, companies or individuals
> mentioned. The information contained in this email is confidential; it is
> intended for the use and benefit of the addressee and shall not be
> disclosed
> to any other person without authority. Please would you kindly notify us
> immediately if you have received this communication in error and then
> delete
> it from your system.
>
>
>
> ~~ Chinwag Jobs: Find your perfect new job or next team member ~~
>
> Chinwag Jobs is the leading specialist recruitment website for digital
> roles in the UK. Used by major companies such as BBC, Electronic
> Arts, Kingston University as well as the majority of recruitment
> agencies who place staff in the sector.
>
> Take a look through our listings or register to advertise your
> own vacancies today.
>
> >> CHINWAG JOBS: http://jobs.chinwag.com
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> You're subscribed to uk-netmarketing to change your options or
> unsubscribe: https://mm.chinwag.com/options/uk-netmarketing
>
> uk-netmarketing discussion list is powered by http://chinwag.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mm.chinwag.com/pipermail/uk-netmarketing/attachments/20120530/23eb490f/attachment.htm