Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

EFF Lead Coalition Announces "Do Not Track" Redux

posted by takyon on Tuesday August 04 2015, @06:05PM   Printer-friendly
from the please-don't-track-us dept.

tt0106977 writes:

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), privacy company Disconnect and a coalition of Internet companies have announced a stronger "Do Not Track" (DNT) setting for Web browsing—a new policy standard that, coupled with privacy software, will better protect users from sites that try to secretly follow and record their Internet activity, and incentivize advertisers and data collection companies to respect a user's choice not to be tracked online.

The new DNT standard is not an ad- or tracker-blocker, but it works in tandem with these technologies.

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
EFF Lead Coalition Announces "Do Not Track" Redux | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 18 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 04 2015, @08:39PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 04 2015, @08:39PM (#218097)

    And they will never get in trouble for lying, just as copyright thugs never get in trouble for misusing the unconstitutional garbage known as the DMCA.

  • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 04 2015, @09:15PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 04 2015, @09:15PM (#218134)

    > And they will never get in trouble for lying,

    Because the FTC never enforces [ftc.gov] privacy [pcworld.com] regulations. [cnn.com] Never [forbes.com] ever [ftc.gov] happens. [techtimes.com]

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 05 2015, @02:44AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 05 2015, @02:44AM (#218313)
    They aren't misusing the DMCA. They bought and paid for the law they wanted, and the law is extremely slanted as a result. Redress for fraudulent takedown requests under the DMCA requires you and/or the site owner to actively sue the parties who made it, and only entitles you to damages and attorney's fees. Wordpress tried to do that once and the courts ruled in their favour, but were unable to track the rascals who did it and so didn't get their damages. Now, if the DMCA actually said that fraudulent takedown requests were a felony with major fines or prison time attached to it, then we'd see everyone being real careful about making such takedown requests, none of this automated DMCA takedown BS we see today. But that's not how the copyright thugs wanted it, so that wasn't the law they bought, and Congress never bloody cared if it meant that it would give what amounts to almost the power to censor at will anything they don't like, in violation of the Constitution they swear to support and defend against all enemies, foreign and domestic.