The spec itself (at the time, at least) said that it could be ignored if the header was always sent/not user-enabled.
Let's assume Aunt Agatha reads about the DNT setting in one of her magazines, goes to the browser settings, sees that it's enabled, takes no further action. That is no different from Uncle Ulysses who has a different browser with a DNT-disabled default who goes to the settings and enables its.
My letterbox has a sticker on it that I don't want to receive unsolicited ads. I don't need anyone to try to presume that it wasn't me who put that sticker onto my letterbox.
After that, I got ads put into my box again. Once I asked one distributee if he can't see the sticker.. "it's damaged. So I thought you wanted to remove that, but it made problems so yo left it striken through"
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Just like the same reason for you can get fined for throwing away litter. If it's not your litter box.. :)
I wish that the free willy said "I don't want" is binding for all people over the world.
In Firefox you can't even turn it off, except maybe via some about:config thingy, so that's not really an entirely valid assumption.
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).
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.
It's EU - the default is to require consent for using personal data (which in at least few of the jurisdictions IPs are included). The the 'default' should be out.
To which I'd say: they shouldn't even see the cookie banner in that case. DNT alone is enough.
And if I say "yes, actually, even though it was very rude of you to ask, given the shirt that I am wearing...in fact, I would like to have sex with you," then you should at least have the decency to wait for me to take my shirt off before having sex with me.
If I decide it's really not worth the effort to take the shirt off, then it turns out, actually, no, I really did not want the sex after all.
Consent/tracking doesn't mean solely 'cookie' banners.
EU courts have already ruled that "cookie banners" that are too-confusing aren't considered consent.
The original Internet Explorer situation was different because it came pre-installed with the operating system, and whether there is choice in operating systems for any given piece of consumer hardware is often rather dubious today (and was probably “no” in more cases back then).
it doesn't need to be argued as the fact that the user did not disable the DNT option in such a browser is the action that matters.
Why?
Then Microsoft enabled it by default in Explorer 10 and the ad networks took it as carte blanche to ignore the DNT header forever, claiming Microsoft had violated the agreement. Nowadays it's usually not set even by the overly privacy conscious out of fingerprinting concerns, since its another unique way to identify your traffic.
The same way they campaigned against adblockers but had their own petty little voluntary pledge thing.
That's what you get when your NGO gets so big your leaders end up playing on the same golf courses and waiting in the same netjets lounges as the enemy.
I couldn't find any explicit discussion of that aspect of the spec (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-mayer-do-not-tra... is an early version), but I suspect that as noirscape wrote, it made consensus-building easier. Not that it mattered in the end, of course.
> According to the General Data Protection Regulation, the right to object to the processing of personal data can also be exercised using automated procedures. A DNT signal represents an effective contradiction.
I assume automated procedures include default settings. Not a lawyer and not from the EU though
How would that work? Has the server a mechanism to check if DNT was set by default on the client/browser?
Obviously, this was a ploy to gut the standard while still pretending to self-regulate.
The choice just happens on a other level.