The Advertising Industry's Definition of 'Do Not Track' Doesn't Make Sense

[Commentary] There is a battle brewing between the Federal Trade Commission and digital advertisers over a system designed to help people control their data called "Do Not Track."

• The FTC seems to define it like this: “An effective Do Not Track system should go beyond simply opting consumers out of receiving targeted advertisements; it should opt them out of collection of behavioral data for all purposes other than those that would be consistent with the context of the interaction.”
• The advertising industry seems to define it as “forbidding the serving of targeted ads to individuals but not prohibiting the collection of data.”

The industry definition of 'Do Not Track' is based on the opt-out language they used in a previous self-regulatory effort. Unfortunately, no one understands the industry's definition because it deviates so far from the standard English definition of the word 'track.' Simply because the industry itself has defined 'Do Not Track' in an idiosyncratic way doesn't mean their self-serving decision should be the basis for all policy and practice in this field. In fact, if the industry is putting up this kind of consumer-unfriendly fight over what DNT should mean, how are we supposed to trust the other self-regulatory moves the industry says it will make to protect consumer privacy?