The Technology 202: More than 200 companies are calling for a national privacy law. Here's an inside look at their proposal.
Dated, but the point still applies: In-Store Tracking Companies Try to Self-Regulate Privacy https://slate.com/technology/2013/0...g-euclid-and-the-future-of-privacy-forum.html FPF should be part of industry panels - not consumer advocacy panels. Prepared testimony at: https://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/hearings?ID=EC293594-BD9A-4F07-9B7D-B9EFE65E7DC4 ACLU: Any federal privacy standards should be a floor —not a ceiling —for consumer protections. The ACLU strongly opposes legislation that would, as some industry groups have urged, preempt stronger state laws. Such an approach would put existing consumer protections, many of which are state-led, on the chopping block and prevent additional consumer privacy protections from ever seeing the light of day. FPF: My core recommendations are that Congress: (1) preserve state Unfair and Deceptive Acts and Practices (UDAP) laws, which regulate a wide range of commercial conduct, from fair pricing to honest advertising, when they do not specifically target privacy or security requirements; (2) preempt generally applicable consumer privacy laws, like the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA); and (3) be thoughtful about which state sectoral privacy laws to preempt or preserve. For example, to the extent that a federal law contains provisions that conflict with state common law or statutes, the latter will be preempted by default. Congress may, to the extent it wishes, take further steps to prevent states or local governments from drafting further new, different, or more protective laws, through express or implied “field preemption.” Within this range, there is great flexibility in the extent to which a federal law can have preemptive effect.
