Photo of Alan Friel

Alan Friel

We are pleased to announce the launch of our firm’s AI Law & Policy Hub, a thought leadership resource focused exclusively on the legal and policy issues around AI. It is a single destination containing all our global multidisciplinary insights, blogs, podcasts and videos including data privacy, intellectual property, competition/antitrust, regulatory, policy and other

Last week was a busy one for AI regulation. The week started and ended with big news from Colorado: on Monday, Colorado’s legislature passed “Concerning Consumer Protections in Interactions with Artificial Intelligence Systems” (SB 24-205) (Colorado AI Law) and, on Friday, Governor Jared Polis (D) signed the Colorado AI Law “with reservations” according to his letter to Colorado’s legislature. Although the Colorado legislature is the first U.S. lawmaker to pass general AI legislation, Colorado’s Governor has expressly invited Congress to replace the Colorado AI Law with a national regulatory scheme before the Colorado AI Law’s February 1, 2026, effective date.Continue Reading All Eyes on AI: Colorado Governor Throws Down the Gauntlet on AI Regulation After Colorado General Assembly Passes the Nation’s First AI Law

Privacy pros know that tracking all the US consumer privacy laws is a challenge. The Privacy World team is here to help. In this post, we’ve collated information and resources regarding the consumer privacy laws in Texas, Oregon and Florida – all three of which are effective as of July 1, 2024. While the Florida privacy law’s status as an “omnibus” consumer privacy law is debatable given its narrow applicability and numerous carveouts, we’ve included it in this post for completeness. We’ve also provided a list of effective dates for the other state consumer privacy laws enacted but not yet in effect and some compliance approaches for your consideration.Continue Reading Are You Ready for July 1? Florida, Oregon, and Texas on Deck

The recently released discussion draft of the American Privacy Rights Act rejects the opt-out approach to targeted advertising in 17 state consumer privacy laws, and instead requires express affirmative opt-in consent for tailoring online ads based on a specific viewer’s interests and activities, akin to the prevailing European approach.  In a guest post published earlier

The California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA) announced three statewide public stakeholder sessions to learn about and provide preliminary feedback on the Agency’s proposed regulations on automated decision-making technology, risk assessments, and cybersecurity audits:

Locations and Times:

  • May 13, 2024, 3:00 pm to 7:00 pm (in-person only)
    Los Angeles Junipero Serra Office Building, 320 West Fourth Street, Los Angeles, CA 90013
  • May 15, 2024, 3:00 pm to 7:00 pm (in-person only)
    Fresno Hugh Burns State Building, 2550 Mariposa Mall, Fresno, CA 91721
  • May 22, 2024, 2:00 pm to 6:00 pm (Hybrid: In-person and streamed via Zoom)
    Sacramento CCAP, 400 R Street, Sacramento, CA 95811

Continue Reading California Privacy Regulator Holds Townhall Sessions On Draft Rules

Washington’s My Health My Data Act (“MHMDA”) and Nevada’s SB 370 (“NV CHD Law”) (collectively, “CHD Laws”) went into effect at the end of last month, on March 31, 2024 (as many know, MHMDA’s geofencing prohibition went into effect last summer). Unlike the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (“HIPAA”), a federal law which governs privacy and security in traditional healthcare settings, CHD Laws regulate “consumer health data” or “CHD”– a very broadly defined term as we discuss below and in a prior post – collected by companies in a broad swath of health and non-health related industries alike. Even ancillary purposes like providing accessibility accommodations and defending personal injury claims are enough to trigger the laws. CHD Laws impose restrictions and obligations on regulated entities far more burdensome than state consumer privacy laws, many of which already regulate some of the same health data, and unlike those general consumer privacy laws are not proposed to be preempted by the potential federal America Privacy Rights Act.

As such, compliance programs that businesses may have developed to comply with state consumer privacy laws, such as the California Privacy Protection Act (“CCPA”), will not be sufficient to address the requirements of the CHD Laws, though they can be leveraged such as for consumer rights request and processor management. There are some material differences beyond the scope of the data regulated. For example, businesses must add another website footer link (and potentially elsewhere, such as in mobile apps) and post a separate privacy policy applicable to the processing of CHD. The facilitation of consumer rights must be CHD-specific, for example providing the right to delete just CHD, rather than all personal information. Moreover, businesses that have CHD use cases not within narrow exceptions (e.g., as necessary to provide a requested product or service), which differ somewhat as between the two laws, will have to grapple with the foreboding consent and authorization requirements which, in some cases, could result in subjecting visitors or customers to a litany of notices and pop-ups in an environment already plagued by what some dub as “consent fatigue.”Continue Reading Are you Ready for Washington and Nevada’s Consumer Health Data Laws?

This week, House Committee on Energy and Commerce Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation Chair Maria Cantwell (D-WA) unveiled their bipartisan, bicameral discussion draft of the American Privacy Rights Act (APRA draft).[1] Chair Rodgers’ and Chair Cantwell’s announcement of the APRA draft surprised many congressional observers after comprehensive privacy legislation stalled in 2022.Continue Reading April’s APRA: Could Draft Privacy Legislation Blossom into Law in 2024?

Following the lead of Europe, four US states currently require businesses to conduct and document assessments to evaluate and mitigate risks in connection with new and ongoing personal data processing activities, and at least eight additional states will do so between now and the end of 2025. California, which applies its requirements beyond traditional consumers to human resources and business-to-business contexts, requires regulatory filings of assessments (which may end up being in abridged form). On March 8, draft California assessment regulations were moved forward toward preparation for public comment, as detailed here. All of the states give regulators the ability to inspect assessments, which must be retained for that purpose. These new obligations will raise the curtain on companies’ info governance practices for regulators, and thereby necessitate robust data protection programs that are more than “window dressing.” Regulators have been clear about their plans to move to more aggressive enforcement of new state privacy laws, as discussed here and here, and assessments will give them a roadmap to do so.Continue Reading US Regulators Lift the Curtain on Data Practices With Assessment, Reporting and Audit Requirements

The staff and board of the California Privacy Protection Agency (“CPPA”) have been working for nearly two years on a new set of proposed rulemaking under the California Consumer Privacy Act, as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act  (“CCPA”).  A year ago the current CCPA regulations were finalized, but several complex issues where reserved for further consideration and some proposals were pulled back to ease initial implementation.  Their enforcement was initially enjoined and delayed by a trial court, but a California appeals court reversed that order, including any delay on the effectiveness of future regulations.  New draft regulations were proposed by the CPPA staff and considered but not approved by the CPPA board in Q4 of 2023.  In February 2024 further revised draft regulations were released and considered on March 8 by the CCPA board, which voted 5 to 0 to move forward amendments to the existing regulations and, after a spirited debate, 3 (Urban, Le and Worthe for) to 2 (de la Torre and Mactaggert against) to also move forward with new draft regulations on data risk assessments and data driven technologies, with a direction to staff to add to the requirements for filing abridged assessments with the CPPA a discussion on what safeguards were employed to mitigate risks (with an exception for when disclosure would be a security risk).  In each case the staff was authorized to prepare the materials necessary under administrative procedures laws and regulations to publish a notice of prepared rulemaking, the publication which will be subject to a further Board vote after reviewing the rule making package.  The staff was also authorized to make further edits to the draft regulations to clarify text or conform with law.  Although the motions did not set a firm date for staff to complete that work, the discussions contemplate that it would be done by the July 2024 Board meeting at the latest.  That could result in effective regulations in Q3, though given the complexity and lack of Board consensus year-end is optimistic.Continue Reading In Narrow Vote California Moves Next Generation Privacy Regs Forward

On March 8, 2024, the California Privacy Protection Agency (“CPPA” or “Agency”) Board (“Board”) will consider draft regulations that set forth how automated decisionmaking technology (“ADMT”) and profiling will be regulated under the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”).  The proposal includes the regulation of a new concept of “behavioral advertising” that is deemed “extensive profiling”