Teemo was then able to openly mention that its method to permission was essentially blessed by the CNIL. (Teemo was gotten by data platform Near in 2020.).
Because the TCF isnt immutable. There have actually been numerous versions of the TCF given that it initially launched in April 2018. The second variation, released in 2020, consisted of extra assistance for genuine interest as a legal basis in addition to explicit permission, and it likewise consists of more comprehensive data processing purposes.
“Data-Driven Thinking” is composed by members of the media neighborhood and includes fresh ideas on the digital revolution in media.
Todays column is written by Allison Schiff, senior editor at AdExchanger. Its part of a series of perspectives from AdExchangers editorial group.
In early February, the other shoe dropped on the Transparency and Consent Framework (TCF).
Belgiums data defense authority identified the IAB Europes TCF as unlawful in its existing form under the General Data Protection Regulation. The decision came more than three years after a group of privacy advocates, consisting of Johnny Ryan, formerly of Brave and now of the Irish Council for Civil Liberties, started a grievance relating to the legality of the TCF.
The DPA hit IAB Europe with a 250,000 euro fine. It also gave the trade org two months to establish a prepare for making the TCF compliant under GDPR– by this point, its got simply over one month left on the clock– followed by another 6 months to put that plan into action.
IAB Europe, naturally, is appealing the judgment. In the meantime, though, an odd dynamic has emerged.
Unsurprisingly, TCF critics are in high spirits. The drum theyve been banging has actually lastly been acknowledged by a regulatory body.
Supporters of the TCF– or at least those on the opposite side of the fence from Ryan and his crowd– appear curiously comforted by the DPAs decision.
As the kids say: Weird flex, however OK. (Although, do kids state this any longer?).
Why are lots of in the ad market holding out hope for the TCF?
Well, remember when Facebooks stock went up in 2019 after the Federal Trade Commission authorized a $5 billion fine for data-sharing and personal privacy violations associated with the Cambridge Analytica scandal?
Thats because investors were eased. Instead of a Sword of Damocles hanging over Facebooks head, the FTC offered investors a procedure of certainty that the episode was over. (At the time, $5 billion was less than a quarter of Facebooks annual revenue.).
By the same token, however on a much, much smaller scale, in August 2018, place data ad tech start-up Teemo was called out by the CNIL, Frances data protection authority, for event and processing information without notified permission. The CNIL threatened Teemo with a fine if it didnt alter its practices.
Teemo worked directly with the CNIL to repair the problem and got the all-clear 2 months later on. Teemo was then able to publicly specify that its technique to approval was essentially blessed by the CNIL. (Teemo was acquired by data platform Near in 2020.).
What does all that pertain to the TCFs current circumstance?
When a regulator acts, it helps clarify the law and gives market individuals a possibility to change their behavior and get a potential seal of approval.
If they thought about the TCF unfixable, the Belgians would not hang a six-month window and use the chance to make changes, Wayne Matus, co-founder and general counsel for compliance startup SafeGuard Privacy, recently observed to AdExchanger.
In other words, why put the important things on life assistance if theres no possibility at survival?
Modifying the TCF.
According to Matus, auditing the TCF– among the compliance requirements required by the Belgian DPA– is possible … its just not “useful.” Now its IAB Europes task to collaborate with people in the DPAs office to make it both possible and useful.
Because the TCF isnt immutable. There have been several iterations of the TCF because it first launched in April 2018. The 2nd version, launched in 2020, included additional support for genuine interest as a legal basis in addition to specific authorization, and it also consists of more comprehensive data processing functions.
Joshua Koran, EVP of data and policy at Criteo, was one of the initial designers of the very first version of the TCF, and he informed me he disagrees with a few of the modifications made in TCF 2.0, consisting of how businesses handle individual information.
TCF 2.0, for instance, increases the number of B2B processing choices that are presented to customers, he stated, and permits publishers to override a users default options.
Ideally, Koran stated, TCF 3.0 would consist of simpler, more reasonable choices for customers; separate signals for consumer choices and for businesses; enhanced transparency and auditability of ad deals across the supply chain; and the ability to audit and implement terms on using digital identifiers. It would also assist, he said, to clarify whether advertising identifiers stay random IDs or can be connected to a real-world person.
Although the procedure will no doubt be uncomfortable, “this decision will unlock to simplifying how we as an industry interact how responsible addressability can continue to support the media owner residential or commercial properties consumers enjoy,” Koran said.
Moment of truthAnd who could disagree with that? Everybody wishes to support media owners.
Simply because the Belgian DPA is providing IAB Europe an opportunity to repair the tcf and attempt does not suggest the TCF is fixable.
Upgrading the TCF to be compliant with GDPR is “useless,” Ruben Schreurs, Ebiquitys group chief product officer, just recently argued in a column for AdExchanger. “The underlying processes for which it seeks to gather permission will never ever be certified unless the system itself is radically revamped.”.
Ryan and his crew (and Im paraphrasing here) think the TCF is lipstick on a pig– but the pig does not have to be made into rashers.
Real-time bidding reimagined does not require personal data to function, and there is some anecdotal evidence that publishers can make it through without it. The Dutch publisher NPO saw advertisement income boost by 149% in 2020 after switching to contextual advertisements.
” Remove all the personal information– thats the obvious option,” Ryan informed me a couple of weeks after the Belgian decision. “We know that can work, and we know its in fact quite efficient.”.
Still, the advertisement industry has invested a lot of time and cash into developing the TCF. Its widely used– hundreds of companies rely on the framework– and the reality stays that the Belgians didnt totally blow it up, which they could have done.
So, is the TCF toast or can it be conserved?
Maybe thats not even the ideal question. Maybe the question is, does it be worthy of to be conserved and is this a chance to start thinking differently?