The fine print in a user agreement for apps includes language explaining what can and cannot be done with the data collected from the consumer. Those words are there not only to indemnify the app’s developer, but to reassure consumers that practical measures are being taken to protect their privacy.

What if the government dictated the information you provided was not just between you and the company whose app you’re using, but also with that company’s competitors? That’s exactly what the Digital Restaurant Association is trying to achieve with its efforts to get local and state governments to enact legislation requiring the data collected from consumers’ who use services like DoorDash and GrubHub be shared.

As the Miami Herald reported, the Digital Restaurant Association tried – but ultimately failed – to get a measure enacted in Miami-Dade County that would have required this data sharing. The Association insisted that they only wanted to “…recognize who you are from your order and make sure they get everything right.” Has the precision of an order ever required background information on the patron placing it?

Actually, it is the first part of the Digital Restaurant Association claimed justification for the ordinance that is telling. They do indeed want to “…recognize who you are…”. They want to know as much about you as possible – even if you never intend to place an order with one of the members of their association.

Threats to our personal data abound. Living in a digital age means much of our personal information – from the financial instruments we use to pay for goods and services to our personal preferences regarding those purchases – is collected by the vendors we use. But, we shouldn’t be forced to disseminate that information to a wider audience by government edict.