Welcome to 2020. The California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”) is now in effect, and your business has probably spent significant time and expense preparing for the law. With so much focus on CCPA preparations, it’s important to recall that the CCPA isn’t the only California privacy law to become effective this year. California will now also require any business that meets the definition of a data broker during a given year to register as a data broker with the California Attorney General’s Office on or before January 31st of the following year. Although the law is not clear whether it retroactively applies to business practices in 2019, the California Office of the Attorney General has issued a press statement on data broker registration and posted a registration page, which strongly indicates that the AG expects qualifying businesses to register by January 31, 2020.

Continue Reading

On Thursday, October 10, 2019, only 83 days before the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”) was set to become effective, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra held a press conference, with no prior notice, and issued his long awaited proposed regulations (the “Regulations”). The hope had been that the Regulations would provide much needed guidance to businesses of all sizes and in all industries as to how to implement a law that was hastily passed in a week’s time in 2018. Instead, while the Regulations provide some clarity around the mechanisms that organizations may use to verify and respond to the various consumer requests allowed by the law, the Regulations also add even more ambiguity to a number of requirements. Even more concerning, the Regulations add some new requirements and deadlines that do not exist in the statute itself.

The Regulations include 24 pages of legalese. Every privacy lawyer I know – and I know the best and the brightest – is struggling to interpret these Regulations and what they really mean. That does not bode well for businesses who (1) are trying to run businesses and not become privacy experts; and (2) cannot afford experienced privacy counsel. And that, in turn, does not help California consumers. As I have said many times before, California can do better. I call again on all California businesses of any size, and in every industry, to submit comments to the Attorney General to let the AG know the impact on your business and the California economy. Comments are due on or before December 6.  There will also be hearings around the state December 2-5. Let’s show up and be heard.

With that, we give you a summary of the Regulations. I would say enjoy, but I know better.


Continue Reading

On May 29, 2019, Nevada’s SB 220[1] became law, amending Nevada’s Privacy Law (2017).[2] The existing Nevada Privacy Law is similar to California’s Online Privacy Protection Act (2004), by requiring a conspicuously posted privacy policy. The new SB 220 resembles the new California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”) but is more narrow in application and scope.


Continue Reading

California’s Senate voted on Thursday to hold SB-561, effectively killing the bill for 2019. The CCPA gives consumers the right to sue a business for data breaches, and SB-561 would have expanded the right to sue for any violation of the CCPA, even technical privacy violations. The death of the bill means that the private right of action will remain limited to data breaches, and the California legislature will not revisit expansion until 2020 at earliest.
Continue Reading

The Office of the California Attorney General (AG) made its fourth stop on its statewide California Consumer Privacy Act listening tour, holding in Los Angeles a public forum on the CCPA. The forums invite public comment as the AG prepares regulations for implementing and enforcing the law. Although the AG specifically requested comment on the seven areas identified in the law for the AG’s regulation,[1] it was clear that some categories caught the attention of the public more than others. And even though the forum was structured to allow participants to provide ideas and suggestions (the AG did not respond to comments or questions presented), most commentators asked for clarity and specific direction from the AG regulations, to help decipher the reach of CCPA and its compliance obligations.


Continue Reading

Vermont’s new Data Broker Regulation (“Regulation”) takes effect on January 1, 2019. The Regulation requires, among other things, that data brokers register with the Vermont Secretary State and protect personally identifiable information of Vermont residents. This week, the Vermont Attorney General issued guidance on the Regulation, which helps address questions on process and scope. Below are some of the key takeaways from the Regulation and guidance.

Continue Reading

This week, the New York State Attorney General announced a $4.95 million settlement with Oath Inc., the result of an investigation into violations of the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (“COPPA”).

The NYAG found that Oath’s ad exchanges transferred persistent identifiers and geolocation from website users to DSP bidders in its automated auction process.  While that may be fine for websites directed to grown-up audiences, COPPA includes persistent identifiers and geolocation in its definition of “personal information.”  And under the law, companies must obtain verifiable parental consent before collecting or using children’s personal information.

But instead of seeking verifiable parental consent, Oath treated all websites (and therefore all user information) the same, despite knowledge that some website inventory on its exchange was directed to children under 13 and subject to COPPA.  And instead of using available technology to avoid the use of children’s information altogether, Oath’s ad exchanges allowed advertisers to collect information on children and display ads on sites targeting children.  The “flagrant” violations of the law led to the largest-ever penalty under COPPA and a settlement agreement provided some remarkable takeaways:


Continue Reading