Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) has introduced a new "Do Not Track" bill to Congress that aims to hold companies accountable for collecting information on consumers after they've expressed a desire to opt out. Called the Do-Not-Track Online Act of 2011 (PDF), the bill would create a "universal legal obligation" for companies to honor users' opt-out requests on the Internet and mobile devices, and would give the Federal Trade Commission the power to take action against companies that don't comply.

"Recent reports of privacy invasions have made it imperative that we do more to put consumers in the driver’s seat when it comes to their personal information," Rockefeller said in a statement. "I believe consumers have a right to decide whether their information can be collected and used online. This bill offers a simple, straightforward way for people to stop companies from tracking their movements online."

According to the bill, the FTC would be tasked with coming up with standards for companies to implement within a year of the bill being signed into law. After a user makes a request to stop being tracked, the companies in question would only be able to continue collecting certain information on customers if it's absolutely necessary in order for the site or service to function. That information must still be anonymized or destroyed after its usefulness expires, and the user must still give explicit consent for the information to be used that way.

Companies that violate the guidelines will have to answer to the FTC and state attorneys general—these groups will be able to pursue violators with civil penalties, and the FTC would be able to take it a step further by pursuing them under the FTC Act. The FTC would even be able to go after nonprofits for Do Not Track violations, despite those groups being generally exempt under the FTC Act.

Positive reaction from privacy groups

Privacy groups seem impressed with the bill, pointing out that the FTC has a good deal of flexibility in tailoring a persistent opt-out mechanism. "This legislation would give Americans the right and the right tools to browse the Internet without their every click being tracked," Consumer Protection director Susan Grant said on a call to discuss the bill after it was introduced. Chris Calabrese from the ACLU agreed, describing the bill as "a crucial civil liberties protection for the twenty-first century." Privacy Rights Clearinghouse founder Beth Givens said she was "very pleased" that Rockefeller introduced the bill, describing it as an "important step in the right direction."

The reaction from these groups is markedly different than their reaction to the Commercial Privacy Bill of Rights Act of 2011 introduced by Senators John Kerry (D-MA) and John McCain (R-AZ) last month. There are a number of differences between the two bills—the Kerry and McCain bill does not have any provisions for a Do Not Track mechanism, and gives the Commerce Department more power than privacy advocates are comfortable with.

"It is important to note that the Commerce Department—as it should—primarily seeks to promote the interests of business. It is not, nor should it be expected to be, the primary protector of consumers’ interests," Consumer Watchdog, the Center for Digital Democracy, Consumer Action, Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, and Privacy Times wrote in a letter following the introduction of Kerry and McCain's bill. "Commerce, therefore, must not have the lead role in online privacy."

Of course, the final details for how companies are supposed to comply with the guidelines of Rockefeller's bill have yet to be hammered out, but the privacy groups seemed optimistic that the FTC could handle the burden. After all, the FTC itself has been pushing for a Do Not Track mechanism online since 2010, and the Obama administration has voiced its support for some kind of "consumer privacy bill of rights." Also, three of the four major browsers (Firefox, Internet Explorer, and Safari) either already support or will soon support Do Not Track opt-out headers originally developed by Mozilla, giving the FTC an easier launching point.

"This is a moment whose time has come," said Consumer Watchdog's Jamie Court.