The UK government has recently published proposals to amend UK data protection legislation with moves towards divergence from EU rules and regulation following the UK’s decision to leave the EU (“Brexit”). The Data Protection and Digital Information Bill (“DPDI Bill”) proposes to make significant changes to existing UK data protection legislation, including the UK General Data protection Regulation (“UK GDPR”) and the Data Protection Act 2018 (“DPA”). The proposals include some measures that will result in a significant divergence, particularly for companies operating on a pan-European basis. While some compliance obligations will be relaxed, most of the changes can best be described as “similar but different” in approach. It remains to be seen what the final text will look like when the bill is passed into law, with some of the more radical proposals already having been dropped from consideration. A crucial point of consideration for UK legislators when the DPDI Bill is making its way through the various stages of the legislative process in the Houses of Parliament will be whether this legislation remains sufficiently similar to the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (“EU GDPR”) that the UK is able to retain its adequacy status for the purposes of exports of personal data from the EU to the UK by companies operating internationally.
A bipartisan group of legislators in Washington, D.C., recently released a discussion draft of a federal privacy bill — the American Data Privacy and Protection Act (ADPPA). This draft bill reaches compromise positions on two key issues that have been the largest obstacles to passing such legislation: state preemption and a private right of action. This discussion draft preempts most comprehensive state privacy laws and includes a narrow and limited private right of action. The compromises on these issues in the bill, however, are likely to draw criticism from both Democrats and Republicans, along with industry and privacy advocates.
The California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (CCPA) and the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 (CPRA) are the most comprehensive privacy rights laws passed in any state — and are widely viewed as potential models for future privacy laws. In this episode of the Faegre Drinker on Law and Technology Podcast, host Jason G. Weiss sits down with former Faegre Drinker associate Michael Jaeger, an authority on the California privacy landscape, to take a deeper look at these sweeping laws, how they are being enforced and the effect they have had on impacted businesses.
The U.K. Information Commissioner’s Office recently confirmed the options and clarified the timing of new data transfer agreements for transfers of personal data out of the U.K. The situation has been somewhat confusing, even to those relatively familiar with international data transfers. Organizations can now review their data transfer arrangements with greater certainty, and this will be a key priority for 2022.
The Illinois Supreme Court ruled that workers compensation preemption is not a defense to plaintiffs’ claims for damages under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act. The February 3, 2022 ruling in McDonald v. Symphony Bronzeville Park, LLC, 2022 IL 126511 will likely awaken many long-stayed BIPA class action lawsuits and pave the way for new ones to be filed.
Following up on a mandatory 2019 request for information issued by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to the largest Internet Service Providers (ISPs) in the United States, the FTC staff in late October issued a Report titled – A Look at What ISPs Know About You: Examining the Privacy Practices of Six Major Internet Service Providers. Among the agency staff’s general findings on ISP data collection and use practices, the most striking perhaps is the apparent degree of integration among ISPs and advertisers with respect to their data collection and use practices. The report also highlights the tools ISPs offer to customers to either manage or control many types of ISP data collection and use.
The information presented in the Report is aggregated and de-identified and has been supplemented with information gathered from follow-up FTC staff questions and meetings with the ISPs that were the subjects of the FTC information request. The Report’s summary of information on real-world ISP data practices could prove useful as Congress wrestles with the potential for federal privacy legislation and states review the need for legislation.