Privacy expert Jessica Rich, the former director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), wrote in the The New York Times this summer that it is “time for Congress” to grant the FTC “the increased authority and resources it has needed for the last 25 years.”
In hiQ Labs, Inc. v. LinkedIn Corporation, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an especially notable decision with respect to the scraping of publicly-available data from the Internet for data analytics. While upholding a preliminary injunction prohibiting LinkedIn from cutting off access to hiQ, the court also held that hiQ’s scraping of such data did not constitute a violation of the federal Computer Fraud & Abuse Act (CFAA). This decision doesn’t completely clear the way for scraping of data from websites without the authorization of the website owner, but it is certainly helpful precedent for data analytics providers.
The marketing research and data analytics industry already has a helpful example of the costs of an overly broad data privacy law in the money spent attempting to comply with Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). A new study tries to quantify the cost of a comprehensive U.S. privacy law modeled on GDPR and the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), the new law coming into effect in the Golden State on January 1, 2020.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is publicly reviewing its rules for the Children’s On
To Sen. John Thune, “the question is no longer whether we need a federal law to protect consumers’ privacy,” but “what shape that law should take.”
The ranking member of the House Energy & Commerce Committee discusses federal privacy regulation in response to GDPR