“MyTerms” wants to become the new way we dictate our privacy on the web

Searls and his group are putting up the standards and letting the browsers, extension-makers, website managers, mobile platforms, and other pieces of the tech stack craft the tools. So long as the human is the first party to a contract, the digital thing is the second, a "disinterested non-profit" provides the roster of agreements, and both sides keep records of what they agreed to, the function can take whatever shape the Internet decides.

Terms offered, not requests submitted

Searls' and his group's standard is a plea for a sensible alternative to the modern reality of accessing web information. It asks us to stop pretending that we're all reading agreements stuffed full with opaque language, agreeing to thousands upon thousands of words' worth of terms every day and willfully offering up information about us. And, of course, it makes people ask if it is due to become another version of Do Not Track.

Do Not Track was a request, while MyTerms is inherently a demand. Websites and services could, of course, simply refuse to show or provide content and data if a MyTerms agent is present, or they could ask or demand that people set the least restrictive terms.

There is nothing inherently wrong with setting up a user-first privacy scheme and pushing for sites and software to do the right thing and abide by it. People may choose to stick to search engines and sites that agree to MyTerms. Time will tell if MyTerms can gain the kind of leverage Searls is aiming for.