The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, the state’s highest appellate court, recently held that website operators’ use of third-party tracking software, including Meta Pixel and Google Analytics, is not prohibited under the state’s Wiretap Act.
Last month, the UK government resurrected previous attempts to reform UK data protection law and introduced the draft Data (Use and Access) Bill into the House of Lords. This blog entry provides a link to read more about the Bill.
On November 8, 2024, the California Privacy Protection Agency Board hosted its public bimonthly meeting, during which it adopted new regulations applicable to data brokers and initiated the formal rulemaking process for proposed regulations for risk assessments, cybersecurity audits, automated decisionmaking technologies and AI, and insurance.
On November 6, 2024, the UK Information Commissioner’s Office published a report following consensual audit engagements conducted between August 2023 and May 2024 with developers and providers of artificial intelligence powered sourcing, screening, and selection tools used in recruitment.
On November 4, 2024, the European Data Protection Board adopted its first report under the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework.
On October 31, 2024, the UK Information Commissioner’s Office published its response to the draft Data (Use and Access) Bill.
On October 23, 2024, the UK government introduced the draft Data (Use and Access) Bill to the House of Lords.
On October 15, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit vacated the dismissal of a proposed class action against the National Basketball Association under the Video Privacy Protection Act, holding that the named plaintiff successfully pled that he was a “consumer” protected by the Act by virtue of his subscription to the Defendant’s online newsletter.
On October 16, 2024, the Federal Trade Commission issued a final Click-to-Cancel Rule, also known as the Negative Option Rule, updating its existing regulatory scheme that requires sellers to make it as easy for consumers to cancel their subscriptions and memberships as it is to sign up in the first place.
On October 4, 2024, the Court of Justice of the European Union issued its judgment in case C‑446/21 to assess whether the GDPR imposes limits to Meta Platforms Ireland’s use of personal data collected outside of the Facebook social network for advertising purposes.
On October 3, 2024, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced a lawsuit against TikTok for operating its platform in violation of the Texas Secure Children Online through Parental Empowerment Act.
On October 9, 2024, the European Data Protection Board adopted an Opinion on certain obligations following from the reliance on processor(s) and sub-processor(s), and Guidelines on the processing of personal data based on legitimate interest.
On September 28, 2024, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law a pair of bills that amend the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 by defining neural data as sensitive personal information and specifying that personal information can exist in various formats.
On September 27, 2024, the Irish Data Protection Commission announced it had issued a fine of 91 million euros and a reprimand against Meta Ireland for inadvertently storing passwords of certain users in plaintext on its internal systems.
On September 24, 2024, a federal district court held that New York City’s Customer Data Law violates the First Amendment.
Last week, the House Energy and Commerce Committee advanced the Kids Online Safety Act (H.R. 7891) and the Children and Teen’s Online Privacy Protection Act (H.R. 7890).
On September 19, 2024, the Federal Trade Commission announced the publication of a staff report entitled, A Look Behind the Screens: Examining the Data Practices of Social Media and Video Streaming Services. The Report documents the data collection and use practices of major social media and video streaming services and provides recommendations for better protecting users’ data and privacy, with a particular focus on children and teens.
On September 4, 2024, the California Privacy Protection Agency issued an Enforcement Advisory on Avoiding Dark Patterns: Clear and Understandable Language, Symmetry in Choice.
On September 13, 2024, the Colorado Department of Law issued proposed draft amendments to the Colorado Privacy Act (“CPA”) Rules and a notice of proposed rulemaking addressing biometric data, minors’ online privacy, and a framework for opinion letters and interpretative guidance.
On September 10, 2024, the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah issued an Order granting a Motion for a Preliminary Injunction, prohibiting the Utah Attorney General from implementing and enforcing the Utah Minor Protection in Social Media Act, which was set to take effect October 1, 2024.
As reported on the Hunton Retail Law resource blog, on August 2, 2024, Illinois amended its Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”), curbing the potential for massive damages and modernizing the law’s written consent provisions. On their face, the amendments are not retroactive. It remains unclear, however, whether this change in Illinois law will nonetheless be applied retroactively by the courts.
On August 1, 2024, the Office of the New York State Attorney General released two Advanced Notices of Proposed Rulemaking (“ANPRM”) for the SAFE for Kids Act and the Child Data Protection Act.
On July 30, 2024, New York Attorney General Letitia James announced the Office of the AG’s publication of two privacy guides, one for businesses and one for consumers, both focused on the use of website tracking technologies.
On July 30, 2024, Texas AG Ken Paxton announced that Meta agreed to pay $1.4 billion to settle a lawsuit over allegations that Meta processed facial geometry data of Texas residents in violation of Texas law, including the Texas Capture or Use of Biometric Identifier Act (“CUBI”).
On July 30, 2024, in a 91-3 vote, the U.S. Senate passed two bills aimed at protecting youth online: the Kids Online Safety Act and the Children and Teens’ Online Privacy Protection Act.
On July 22, 2024, Google announced that the company is scrapping its plans to phase out the use of third-party cookies in its Chrome browser. Google previously announced plans in 2020 to phase out third-party cookies, a digital advertising tool that tracks consumers’ Internet activity across websites. The company intended to replace third-party cookies with privacy-protective APIs through its Privacy Sandbox initiative.
On July 23, 2024, the Federal Trade Commission announced that it had launched a study of eight companies’ “surveillance pricing” practices. According to the FTC, “the orders are aimed at helping the FTC better understand the opaque market for products by third-party intermediaries that claim to use advanced algorithms, artificial intelligence and other technologies, along with personal information about consumers—such as their location, demographics, credit history, and browsing or shopping history—to categorize individuals and set a targeted price for a product or service.”
On July 22, 2024, Google announced that the company had scrapped its plan to phase out the use of third-party cookies in its Chrome browser.
On July 9, 2024, the Federal Trade Commission issued a proposed order that banned NGL Labs, LLC, and two of its co-founders from offering an anonymous messaging app called “NGL: ask me anything” to children under the age of 18.
On June 26, 2024, the California Privacy Protection Agency (“CPPA” or the “Agency”) held a virtual preliminary stakeholder session regarding a data broker accessible deletion mechanism.
On July 2, 2024, the French Data Protection Authority (the “CNIL”) published a new set of guidelines addressing the development of artificial intelligence (“AI”) systems from a data protection perspective (the “July AI Guidelines”).
On June 20, 2024, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas Fort Worth Division ruled that guidance issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) relating to online tracking technologies exceeded HHS’ authority and ordered that it be vacated.
In April 2024, the National Institute of Standards and Technology released an initial draft of its AI Risk Management Framework Generative AI Profile. This blog entry provides a summary of the Generative AI Profile.
On June 17, 2024, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued an opinion in Zellmer v. Meta Platforms, Inc., No. 22-16925, (9th Cir. June 17, 2024) affirming the Northern District of California’s order granting summary judgment in favor of Meta and dismissing the action for lack of standing. Clayton Zellmer, an individual who had never used Facebook, brought claims against the social media company under the Illinois Biometrics Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”), alleging that Meta had improperly obtained his biometric data from photos Zellmer’s friends had uploaded to the platform. Zellmer alleged that Facebook’s “Tag Suggestions” feature, which created a “face signature” using photos of Zellmer, violated Sections 15(a) and 15(b) of BIPA by collecting, using, and storing his biometric identifiers without first obtaining his written consent or establishing a public retention schedule. On appeal, the Ninth Circuit held that “face signatures” are not biometric information or identifiers, and thus are not subject to BIPA.
On June 7, 2024, following a public consultation, the French Data Protection Authority published the final version of the guidelines addressing the development of AI systems from a data protection perspective.
The Centre for Information Policy Leadership at Hunton Andrews Kurth, in partnership with WeProtect Global Alliance, held a series of interactive workshops on digital age assurance as part of its Children’s Privacy Project. They are seeking interested professionals to join their working groups as part of several workshops.
On June 7, 2024, the New York legislature passed a bill (S.B. S7694A), the Stop Addictive Feeds Exploitation (SAFE) for Kids Act, addressing children’s use of social media platforms. The bill is pending Governor Kathy Hochul’s signature.
On May 1, 2024, the UK Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”) and the UK regulator for communications and online safety, Ofcom, issued a joint statement regarding their collaboration on the regulation of online services where online safety and data protection intersect. This statement builds on the joint statement published in 2022. The latest statement outlines several areas of collaboration between the ICO and Ofcom.
On April 7, 2024, U.S. Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and U.S. Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) released a discussion draft of the latest federal privacy proposal, known as American Privacy Rights Act (“APRA” or the “Act”). The APRA builds upon the American Data Privacy and Protection Act (“ADPPA”), which was introduced as H.R. 8152 in the 117th Congress and advanced out of the House Energy and Commerce Committee but did not become law. As the latest iteration of a federal privacy proposal, the APRA signals that some members of Congress continue to seek to create a federal standard in the wake of—and in spite of—the ever-growing patchwork of state privacy laws.
On April 9, 2024, Representatives Tim Walberg (R-MI) and Kathy Castor (D-FL) introduced the Children and Teens’ Online Privacy Protection Act (“COPPA 2.0.”) The bill serves as a companion to the Senate bill by the same name.
On March 1, 2024, the Virginia legislature passed S.B. 361 (the “Bill”), which amends the Virginia Consumer Data Protection Act to introduce new protections for children’s privacy. If signed by the Virginia Governor, the new children’s privacy protections will go into effect on January 1, 2025.
Bloomberg Law reported that the Federal Communications Commission adopted rules creating a voluntary cybersecurity labeling program for wireless consumer Internet of Things products, as well as a further notice of proposed rulemaking that seeks comments addressing additional disclosure requirements for program participants with respect to national security.
Last week, Utah Governor Spencer J. Cox signed three privacy-related bills into law. The bills are focused on, respectively, protection of motor vehicle consumer data, regulations on social media companies with respect to minors, and access to protected health information by third parties. The Utah legislature appears to be focused on data-related legislation this session, as Governor Cox signed two other bills related to AI into law last week as well.
On March 7, 2024, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) issued its judgment in the case of IAB Europe (Case C‑604/22). In this judgment, the CJEU assessed the role of the Interactive Advertising Bureau Europe (“IAB Europe”) in the processing operations associated with its Transparency and Consent Framework (“TCF”) and further developed CJEU case law on the concept of personal data under the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”).
On February 26, 2024, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (“NIST”) announced the release of Version 2.0 of its voluntary Cybersecurity Framework (“CSF”).
The first iteration of the CSF was released in 2014 as a result of an Executive Order, to help organizations understand, manage, and reduce their cybersecurity risks. The original CSF was developed for organizations in the critical infrastructure sector, such as hospitals and power plants, but has since been voluntarily implemented across various sectors and industries, including throughout schools and local governments.
On February 22, 2024, the Federal Trade Commission announced a settlement order against Avast Limited (“Avast”) requiring Avast to pay $16.5 million and prohibiting Avast from selling or licensing any web browsing data for advertising purposes. This ban is to settle charges that the company and its subsidiaries sold such information to third parties after promising that its products would protect consumers from online tracking.
On February 12, 2024, California bill AB-1949 was referred to the Assembly Committee on Privacy and Consumer Protection. The bill would amend the California Consumer Privacy Act (as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act) (the “CCPA”) to significantly expand businesses’ obligations with respect to the personal information of consumers under the age of 18.
On February 21, 2024, the California Attorney General announced that it had reached a settlement resolving an enforcement action under the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”) and the California Online Privacy Protection Act (“CalOPPA”) brought against online food delivery company DoorDash, Inc. (the “Company”). This is the AG’s second CCPA enforcement settlement, following the agency’s settlement with Sephora.
On February 16, 2024, the UK Information Commissioner’s Office (the “ICO”) published its first piece of guidance on content moderation. The ICO defines content moderation in the guidance as the analysis of user-generated content to assess whether it meets certain standards, and any action a service takes as a result of this analysis. This process includes the processing of personal data and, according to the ICO in its statement, “can cause harm if incorrect decisions are made,” for example content being incorrectly defined as illegal.
On February 12, 2024, a federal court in the Southern District of Ohio issued an order granting a Motion for a Preliminary Injunction, prohibiting the Ohio Attorney General from implementing and enforcing the Parental Notification by Social Media Operators Act, Ohio Rev. Code § 1349.09(B)(1) (the “Act”).
On February 9, 2024, a California state court of appeal ruled in favor of the California Privacy Protection Agency (“CPPA”) and vacated the lower court order postponing enforcement of the CPPA’s final regulations under the California Consumer Privacy Act.
In the latest evolution of lawsuits challenging technologies that track website users, California class action plaintiffs have begun to file under a new theory—the pen register and trap and trace device theory under Section 638.51 of the California Invasion of Privacy Act (“CIPA”).
In November 2023, the UK Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”) wrote to organizations operating 53 of the UK’s biggest websites regarding their compliance with data protection laws when using cookies. On January 31, 2024, the ICO released a statement on such action noting that it received “an overwhelmingly positive response” with 38 of those organizations having changed their cookie banners in order to come into compliance. Others have either committed to ensuring compliance within a month, or are exploring other solutions such as contextual advertising.
On January 18, 2024, the UK Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”) published an updated Opinion on age assurance for the Children’s Code (the “Opinion”). The Children’s Code is a statutory code of practice setting out how information society services likely to be accessed by children should protect children’s information rights online.
On January 9, 2024, the Federal Trade Commission published a blog post reminding artificial intelligence (“AI”) “model-as-a-service” companies to uphold the privacy commitments they make to customers, including promises made in Terms of Service agreements, promotional materials and online marketplaces.
On December 18, 2023, the updated response from UK Information Commissioner John Edwards to the Data Protection and Digital Information (No 2) Bill (the “Bill”) was published on the website of the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). The Commissioner’s original response was published in March 2023. In the latest response, the Commissioner states that he is “pleased to note that government made some changes…in response to my comments,” specifically with regards the definition of “vexatious requests” in respect of requests made to the Information Commissioner’s Office, and the drafting of the changes to the safeguards for processing for research purposes. However, the Commissioner goes on to state that the majority of his comments currently remain unaddressed, including with regards the definition of high risk processing.
On December 12, 2023, the Centre for Information Policy Leadership at Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP (“CIPL”) released a white paper on Privacy-Enhancing and Privacy-Preserving Technologies: Understanding the Role of PETs and PPTs in the Digital Age.
On December 12, 2023, the UK Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”) announced that it is producing an online resource relating to employment practices and data protection. The ICO also announced that it would be releasing draft guidance on the different topic areas to be included in the resource in stages, and adding to it over time. The ICO provided draft guidance on “Keeping employment records” and “Recruitment and selection” for consultation. The former draft guidance aims to provide direction on compliance with data protection law when keeping records ...
On November 27, 2023, the California Privacy Protection Agency (“CPPA”) published its draft regulations on automated decisionmaking technology (“ADMT”). The regulations propose a broad definition for ADMT that includes “any system, software, or process—including one derived from machine-learning, statistics, or other data-processing or artificial intelligence—that processes personal information and uses computation as whole or part of a system to make or execute a decision or facilitate human decisionmaking.” ADMT also would include profiling, which would mean the “automated processing of personal information to evaluate certain personal aspects relating to a natural person and in particular to analyze or predict aspects concerning that natural person’s performance at work, economic situation, health, personal preferences, interests, reliability, behavior, location, or movements.”
On November 21, 2023, the UK Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”) issued a statement explaining that it has recently written to companies operating some of the UK’s most visited websites regarding their compliance with data protection laws when using cookies. The ICO noted that certain websites are not providing users with fair choices as to whether or not they are tracked for personalized marketing purposes, and referred to its guidance on making it simple for users to “Reject All” advertising cookies.
On October 30, 2023, the Federal Trade Commission announced that it is sending nearly $100 million in refunds to consumers who were harmed as a result of internet phone service provider Vonage’s alleged use of dark patterns and other obstacles that made it difficult for users to cancel their service.
On October 17, 2023, the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (“OPC”) announced the release of two companion documents that provide further guidance on protecting the privacy of young people. This guidance follows the recently adopted resolution on young people’s privacy by federal, provincial, and territorial regulators earlier in the month.
On October 26, 2023, the UK Online Safety Act (the “Act”) received Royal Assent, making it law in the UK. The Act seeks to protect children from online harm and imposes obligations on relevant organizations, including social media platforms, to prevent and remove illegal and harmful content. In a press release, the UK Government stated that the Act “takes a zero-tolerance approach to protecting children from online harm, while empowering adults with more choices over what they see online.” For example, the Act requires relevant organizations to:
On October 18, 2023, California Attorney General Rob Bonta filed an appeal to overturn a preliminary injunction issued by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California last month that prevents the enforcement of the California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act (“CA AADC”). The appeal was submitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and marks an important step in assessing the potential progress of the CA AADC.
On September 29, 2023, the Supreme Court of the United States (“SCOTUS”) accepted petitions challenging the constitutionality of social media laws in Florida and Texas. Florida’s law, S.B. 7072, prohibits “a social media platform from willfully deplatforming a [political] candidate.” Texas’s law, H.B. 20, refers to social media platforms as “common carriers” that are “central public forums for public debate,” and requires common carriers to publicly disclose information related to the common carrier’s method of recommending content to users, content moderation efforts, use of algorithms to determine search results, and the common carrier’s ordinary disclosures to its users on user performance data for each of its platforms. Both of these laws were challenged by NetChoice, LLC, a national trade association of large online businesses, who had recent successes in blocking several laws, including the California Age-Appropriate Design Code and a similar social media law in Arkansas.
On July 5, 2023, Ohio Governor, Mike DeWine, signed into law House Bill 33, which includes the Social Media Parental Notification Act (“Act”).
On September 14, 2023, California Attorney General Rob Bonta announced a $93 million settlement with Google, LLC (“Google”) resolving alleged violations of California’s false advertising law and unfair competition law.
On August 8, 2023, the Massachusetts Gaming Commission approved 205 CMR 257: Sports Wagering Data Privacy, a set of regulations designed to create new rights and obligations with respect to sports betting operators’ use of patrons’ Confidential Information or Personally Identifiable Information. The regulations took effect on September 1, 2023.
On September 18, 2023, Judge Beth Labson Freeman of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted NetChoice’s request for preliminary injunction in NetChoice v. Bonta, finding that NetChoice is likely to succeed on its claim that the California Age-Appropriate Design Code (“CA AADC”) violates the First Amendment. Specifically, the Court found that, as a speech restriction, the CA AADC would likely fail both strict scrutiny and a lesser standard of scrutiny. The preliminary injunction blocks the CA AADC from going into effect until the case is ...
On August 31, 2023, NetChoice, a national trade association of large online businesses, filed supplemental briefing in its challenge to the California Age-Appropriate Design Code (“CA AADC”). The success or failure of NetChoice’s lawsuit will determine whether companies need to be CA AADC-compliant on July 1, 2024 when the law is anticipated to take effect.
On July 10, 2023, California Governor Newsom signed into law A.B. 127, which places the working group for the California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act (the “Act”) under the California Office of the Attorney General. The Act creates a working group, formally named the California Children’s Data Protection Working Group, to produce a report on recommendations for best practices concerning children’s access to online services. Under A.B. 127, the deadline for the first report from the working group will be pushed back from January 1, 2024, to July 1, 2024, and the working group will be required to consist of only nine members, instead of the original 10-member requirement.
On July 14, 2023, the Norwegian Data Protection Authority (“DPA”) ordered Meta Platforms Ireland Limited and Facebook Norway AS (jointly, “Meta”) to temporarily cease the processing of personal data of data subjects in Norway for the purpose of targeting ads on the basis of “observed behavior,” when relying on either the contractual necessity legal basis (Article 6(1)b)) or the legitimate interests legal basis (Article 6(1)(f)) of the GDPR.
On June 28, 2023, Louisiana Governor John Bel Edwards signed into law H.B. 61, which requires interactive computer services to get parental consent (or consent from a legal representative of a minor) to enter into a contract or other agreement, including the creation of an online account, with minors younger than 18 years of age. The Act comes after similar laws enacted in Texas, Utah and Arkansas. H.B. 61 will take effect on August 1, 2024.
On June 2 and June 5, 2023, the Connecticut and Nevada state legislatures, respectively, voted in favor of sending legislation to their governors for signature that would impose restrictions, among others, on the processing of consumer health data, including geofencing provisions. Nevada S.B. 370 was signed by Nevada Governor Joe Lombardo on June 16, 2023. These bills contain provisions similar to Washington’s My Health My Data Act and expand on protections in the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 and other privacy laws.
On May 24, 2023 Google LLC (“Google”) announced its recently updated privacy terms providing that, for many of Google’s advertising services, it will no longer act as a service provider for the purposes of the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 (“CPRA”). The change may affect businesses’ prior determinations of whether they “sell” personal information under the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (“CCPA”). The updated terms take effect on July 1, 2023, the day CPRA enforcement begins.
On May 31, 2023, the Federal Trade Commission announced a proposed order against home security camera company Ring LLC (“Ring”) for unfair and deceptive acts or practices in violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act.
On May 22, 2023, the Federal Trade Commission filed an amicus brief in support of a ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that COPPA does not preempt state laws claims that are consistent with COPPA.
On May 22, 2023, the Federal Trade Commission announced a proposed order against education technology provider Edmodo, LLC (“Edmodo”) for violations of the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule (“COPPA Rule”) and Section 5 of the FTC Act.
On May 4, 2023, the Florida Senate and House of Representatives voted in favor of sending the Florida Digital Bill of Rights (“FDBR”) and other amendments related to government moderation of social media and protection of children in online spaces (S.B. 262) to Governor Ron DeSantis for signature. Unlike the other comprehensive state privacy laws that have been enacted, the FDBR applies to a much narrower subset of entities.
On May 4, 2023, the California Privacy Protection Agency (“CPPA”) Board announced that it will hold a public meeting on May 15, 2023 to discuss California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 (“CPRA”) regulations proposals and priorities, and other CPPA activities.
On April 25, 2023, officials from the Federal Trade Commission, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”), Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division (“DOJCRD”) and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) released a Joint Statement on Enforcement Efforts against Discrimination and Bias in Automated Systems (“Statement”), also sometimes referred to as “artificial intelligence” (“AI”).
On April 6, 2023, the New York City Department of Consumer and Worker Protection ("DCWP") announced it adopted final rules to implement NYC’s Local Law 144 (“LL 144”) regarding automated employment decision tools (“AEDTs”). Enforcement of the law and the rules will begin on July 5, 2023.
On March 3, 2023, the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) released an update to its Evaluation of Corporate Compliance Programs guidance (“ECCP Guidance”). The ECCP Guidance serves as a guidance document for prosecutors when evaluating a corporate compliance program. Among other updates, the ECCP Guidance now includes new guidance for assessing how companies govern employees’ use of personal devices, communication platforms and messaging applications.
On March 2, 2023, the FTC announced a proposed order against BetterHelp, Inc., an online mental health counseling service, for sharing consumer data, including sensitive mental health information, with third parties for targeted advertising and other purposes. The FTC’s proposed order is notable, in that it is the first such order that would return funds to consumers whose health data was affected.
On February 28, 2023, the Colorado Office of the Attorney General announced that revised draft Colorado Privacy Act (“CPA”) rules were adopted for review by the Colorado Attorney General prior to finalization and publication in the Colorado Register.
On February 14, 2023, the Digital Advertising Alliance (“DAA”) announced the creation of the CMP Complement, billed as a uniform approach for brands and publishers to offer privacy controls on sites and apps through Consent Management Platforms (CMPs) and the AdChoices program. The CMP Complement integrates the AdChoices Icon into participating CMPs’ user flows and provides easier user access to both CMP-specific controls and other interest-based advertising choice tools offered through the DAA’s portals.
On February 14, 2023, the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary held a hearing titled, “Protecting Our Children Online.” Chaired by Sen. Durbin, the hearing examined the potentially harmful effects of social media use on young people, and represented a renewal of the Committee’s efforts to pass legislation to protect children and teenagers online. In 2022, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved several bills designed to enhance the online safety and wellbeing of children and teenagers, among them the Kids Online Protection Act (“KOSA”), but the bills did not receive a floor vote. During the hearing, Democratic and Republican senators expressed their commitment to pass bills that would limit the immunity of social media companies under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, and would require website and app developers to design products that protect young people from cyberbullying, online sexual exploitation, social media addiction, and other harms.
On February 10, 2023, the California Privacy Protection Agency (“CPPA”) issued an Invitation for Preliminary Comments on Proposed Rulemaking on cybersecurity audits, risk assessments and automated decisionmaking, topics that have not yet been addressed by the existing final draft CPRA Regulations.
On February 6, 2023, Texas State Representative Giovanni Capriglione submitted H.B. 1844, a comprehensive privacy bill modeled after the Virginia Consumer Data Protection Act (“VCDPA”). The bill could make Texas the sixth U.S. state to enact major privacy legislation, following California, Virginia, Colorado, Utah, and Connecticut. Although the bill closely follows the VCDPA, it departs from the Virginia law in several key areas, most notably in the definition of “personal data” and its applicability.
On February 3, 2023, the California Privacy Protection Agency (“CPPA”) Board unanimously approved for submission to California’s Office of Administrative Law (“OAL”) proposed final California Privacy Rights Act (“CPRA”) regulations released on January 31, 2023 which update the draft CPRA regulations released on November 3, 2022.
On January 26, 2023, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (“NIST”) released the Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework (“AI RMF 1.0”), which provides a set of guidelines for organizations that design, develop, deploy or use AI to manage its many risks and promote trustworthy and responsible use and development of AI systems.
On January 27, 2023, California Attorney General Rob Bonta announced a new enforcement sweep aimed at businesses with mobile apps and other businesses that fail to comply with the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”).
On December 1, 2022, the Office for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) released a Bulletin on the obligations of HIPAA covered entities and business associates under the HIPAA Privacy, Security, and Breach Notification Rules when using online tracking technologies.
On December 6, 2022, the California Privacy Protection Agency (“CPPA”) announced that it will hold a virtual public meeting to discuss the status of the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 (“CPRA”) rulemaking process and other topics. Anticipated topics for discussion include:
On November 25, 2022, Ireland’s Data Protection Commission (“DPC”) released a decision fining Meta Platforms, Inc. (“Meta”) €265 million for a 2019 data leak involving the personal information of approximately 533 million Facebook users worldwide.
On November 21, 2022, Meta Platforms, Inc. (“Meta”) announced updated practices designed to protect the privacy of young people on Facebook and Instagram, including default privacy settings for new accounts, measures to limit unwanted interactions with adult users, and a tool to limit the spread of teens’ intimate images online.
On November 30, 2022, the UK government confirmed that the Network and Information Systems (“NIS”) Regulations 2018 (“NIS Regulations”) will be strengthened to protect essential and digital services against cyber attacks. The changes bring providers of outsourced IT and managed service providers (“MSPs”) into scope of the NIS Regulations. The announcement comes in response to a public consultation held in January this year.
On November 25, 2022, the UK Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”) and the UK’s communications regulator, Ofcom, issued a joint statement setting out how they intend to work together to “ensure coherence between the data protection and the new online safety regimes.” The regulators noted that the statement is primarily intended for online service providers that are likely to be regulated under the online safety regime, but it also will be of interest to other stakeholders as an indication of their joint direction.
As reported in the the Retail Industry Law Resource blog:
Plaintiff’s firms continue to file variations of state law wiretapping lawsuits over “session replay” software and “live chat” or “chatbot” applications in various jurisdictions. These filings typically allege that companies use such software tools to record users’ interactions with a website without first obtaining users’ consent, thereby violating the wiretapping, eavesdropping, or interception provisions of various state laws. Session replay software allows companies to record and play back user’s interactions on its websites. The “live chat” or “chatbot” feature allows a website user to engage in text conversations with an assistant, to which chat the company has access. These wiretapping claims threaten substantial penalties. Companies that use these web-tracking tools, however, can take steps to protect themselves from these lawsuits by a careful examination of the software being used and by evaluating what disclosures or consent may be warranted.
On November 14, 2022, Judge Edward J. Davila of the Northern District of California approved a $90 million privacy settlement against Meta Platforms, Inc. (formerly Facebook, Inc.) for unlawfully tracking user information when users were logged out of the site. Under the order granting plaintiffs’ motion for final approval of the class action settlement and attorney fees, Facebook must pay $90 million dollars in settlements, of which $26.1 million will be for attorney fees, and delete certain “wrongfully collected” data. Despite numerous objections that the settlement ...
Search
Recent Posts
Categories
- Behavioral Advertising
- Centre for Information Policy Leadership
- Children’s Privacy
- Cyber Insurance
- Cybersecurity
- Enforcement
- European Union
- Events
- FCRA
- Financial Privacy
- General
- Health Privacy
- Identity Theft
- Information Security
- International
- Marketing
- Multimedia Resources
- Online Privacy
- Security Breach
- U.S. Federal Law
- U.S. State Law
- Workplace Privacy
Tags
- Aaron Simpson
- Accountability
- Adequacy
- Advertisement
- Advertising
- American Privacy Rights Act
- Anna Pateraki
- Anonymization
- Anti-terrorism
- APEC
- Apple Inc.
- Argentina
- Arkansas
- Article 29 Working Party
- Artificial Intelligence
- Australia
- Austria
- Automated Decisionmaking
- Baltimore
- Bankruptcy
- Belgium
- Biden Administration
- Big Data
- Binding Corporate Rules
- Biometric Data
- Blockchain
- Bojana Bellamy
- Brazil
- Brexit
- British Columbia
- Brittany Bacon
- Brussels
- Business Associate Agreement
- BYOD
- California
- CAN-SPAM
- Canada
- Cayman Islands
- CCPA
- CCTV
- Chile
- China
- Chinese Taipei
- Christopher Graham
- CIPA
- Class Action
- Clinical Trial
- Cloud
- Cloud Computing
- CNIL
- Colombia
- Colorado
- Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States
- Commodity Futures Trading Commission
- Compliance
- Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
- Congress
- Connecticut
- Consent
- Consent Order
- Consumer Protection
- Cookies
- COPPA
- Coronavirus/COVID-19
- Council of Europe
- Council of the European Union
- Court of Justice of the European Union
- CPPA
- CPRA
- Credit Monitoring
- Credit Report
- Criminal Law
- Critical Infrastructure
- Croatia
- Cross-Border Data Flow
- Cyber Attack
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency
- Data Brokers
- Data Controller
- Data Localization
- Data Privacy Framework
- Data Processor
- Data Protection Act
- Data Protection Authority
- Data Protection Impact Assessment
- Data Transfer
- David Dumont
- David Vladeck
- Delaware
- Denmark
- Department of Commerce
- Department of Health and Human Services
- Department of Homeland Security
- Department of Justice
- Department of the Treasury
- District of Columbia
- Do Not Call
- Do Not Track
- Dobbs
- Dodd-Frank Act
- DPIA
- E-Privacy
- E-Privacy Directive
- Ecuador
- Ed Tech
- Edith Ramirez
- Electronic Communications Privacy Act
- Electronic Privacy Information Center
- Elizabeth Denham
- Employee Monitoring
- Encryption
- ENISA
- EU Data Protection Directive
- EU Member States
- European Commission
- European Data Protection Board
- European Data Protection Supervisor
- European Parliament
- Facial Recognition Technology
- FACTA
- Fair Credit Reporting Act
- Fair Information Practice Principles
- Federal Aviation Administration
- Federal Bureau of Investigation
- Federal Communications Commission
- Federal Data Protection Act
- Federal Trade Commission
- FERC
- FinTech
- Florida
- Food and Drug Administration
- Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
- France
- Franchise
- Fred Cate
- Freedom of Information Act
- Freedom of Speech
- Fundamental Rights
- GDPR
- Geofencing
- Geolocation
- Georgia
- Germany
- Global Privacy Assembly
- Global Privacy Enforcement Network
- Gramm Leach Bliley Act
- Hacker
- Hawaii
- Health Data
- Health Information
- HIPAA
- HIPPA
- HITECH Act
- Hong Kong
- House of Representatives
- Hungary
- Illinois
- India
- Indiana
- Indonesia
- Information Commissioners Office
- Information Sharing
- Insurance Provider
- Internal Revenue Service
- International Association of Privacy Professionals
- International Commissioners Office
- Internet
- Internet of Things
- IP Address
- Ireland
- Israel
- Italy
- Jacob Kohnstamm
- Japan
- Jason Beach
- Jay Rockefeller
- Jenna Rode
- Jennifer Stoddart
- Jersey
- Jessica Rich
- John Delionado
- John Edwards
- Kentucky
- Korea
- Latin America
- Laura Leonard
- Law Enforcement
- Lawrence Strickling
- Legislation
- Liability
- Lisa Sotto
- Litigation
- Location-Based Services
- London
- Madrid Resolution
- Maine
- Malaysia
- Markus Heyder
- Maryland
- Massachusetts
- Meta
- Mexico
- Microsoft
- Minnesota
- Mobile App
- Mobile Device
- Montana
- Morocco
- MySpace
- Natascha Gerlach
- National Institute of Standards and Technology
- National Labor Relations Board
- National Science and Technology Council
- National Security
- National Security Agency
- National Telecommunications and Information Administration
- Nebraska
- NEDPA
- Netherlands
- Nevada
- New Hampshire
- New Jersey
- New Mexico
- New York
- New Zealand
- Nigeria
- Ninth Circuit
- North Carolina
- Norway
- Obama Administration
- OECD
- Office for Civil Rights
- Office of Foreign Assets Control
- Ohio
- Oklahoma
- Opt-In Consent
- Oregon
- Outsourcing
- Pakistan
- Parental Consent
- Payment Card
- PCI DSS
- Penalty
- Pennsylvania
- Personal Data
- Personal Health Information
- Personal Information
- Personally Identifiable Information
- Peru
- Philippines
- Phyllis Marcus
- Poland
- PRISM
- Privacy By Design
- Privacy Policy
- Privacy Rights
- Privacy Rule
- Privacy Shield
- Protected Health Information
- Ransomware
- Record Retention
- Red Flags Rule
- Regulation
- Rhode Island
- Richard Thomas
- Right to Be Forgotten
- Right to Privacy
- Risk-Based Approach
- Rosemary Jay
- Russia
- Safe Harbor
- Sanctions
- Schrems
- Scott Kimpel
- Securities and Exchange Commission
- Security Rule
- Senate
- Serbia
- Service Provider
- Singapore
- Smart Grid
- Smart Metering
- Social Media
- Social Security Number
- South Africa
- South Carolina
- South Dakota
- South Korea
- Spain
- Spyware
- Standard Contractual Clauses
- State Attorneys General
- Steven Haas
- Stick With Security Series
- Stored Communications Act
- Student Data
- Supreme Court
- Surveillance
- Sweden
- Switzerland
- Taiwan
- Targeted Advertising
- Telecommunications
- Telemarketing
- Telephone Consumer Protection Act
- Tennessee
- Terry McAuliffe
- Texas
- Text Message
- Thailand
- Transparency
- Transportation Security Administration
- Trump Administration
- United Arab Emirates
- United Kingdom
- United States
- Unmanned Aircraft Systems
- Uruguay
- Utah
- Vermont
- Video Privacy Protection Act
- Video Surveillance
- Virginia
- Viviane Reding
- Washington
- Whistleblowing
- Wireless Network
- Wiretap
- ZIP Code