Discussion in 'privacy general' started by ronjor, Sep 26, 2018.
By Gennie Gebhart and India McKinney September 26, 2018
New Witness Panel Tells Congress How to Protect Consumer Data Privacy
Tech lobby outlines its own set of privacy regulations
Intel Asks for Comments on Draft Federal Privacy Law
The Technology 202: More than 200 companies are calling for a national privacy law. Here's an inside look at their proposal.
Got them running scared, I guess
As Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg said users are "dumb *****".
Yeah, but he was probably drunk when he said that
Consumer Groups Protest Being Left Out of Senate Privacy Hearing
Consumer advocates give Congress a different perspective on data privacy law
Dated, but the point still applies:
In-Store Tracking Companies Try to Self-Regulate Privacy
FPF should be part of industry panels - not consumer advocacy panels.
Prepared testimony at:
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.
Separate names with a comma.