4 ms·
Spec largely doesn't matter for what the courts think; DNT is considered by them to be a valid signal for not wanting to be tracked in the eyes of the court acc
by noirscape 3y ago
Spec largely doesn't matter for what the courts think; DNT is considered by them to be a valid signal for not wanting to be tracked in the eyes of the court according to the ruling. (note: I am not a lawyer.)
You could argue that by using a browser where the DNT header is set by default, they are making that decision on their privacy by y'know, using those browsers over the ones where they're not set by default. Ad companies don't want that argument, they want you to opt out in every browser (and ideally they'd just ignore the header entirely, which they do after Microsoft enabled it by default in Explorer).
- HelloNurse 3y agoDiscussing defaults is only a distraction. Browsers are, in their own words, a "user agent" and their requests are the user's requests.
- Aerroon 3y agoIf this were true, then wouldn't your browser sending out personal data constitute consent to have that data tracked? After all, the website asks you to give them the data and the browser complies.
- noirscape 3y agoTo be fair, Chrome is basically doing everything it can to stop being the users agent and is instead Googles fun magic box you use to see what goes on on the internet (with the explicit long-term goal for Chrome to just be Googles freely downloadable OS overlaid onto your Windows/Mac/Linux, given how many system APIs Google keeps dumping into the browser). I don't blame people for forgetting that part sometimes, given how 90% of the population uses a browser that doesn't serve their interests.