FTC Takes Action Against Companies Misrepresenting Compliance with the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield and Other International Privacy Agreements
Time 2 Minute Read

On June 14, 2019, the Federal Trade Commission announced that it has taken action against a number of companies that allegedly misrepresented their compliance with the EU-U.S. and Swiss-U.S. Privacy Shield frameworks (collectively, the “Privacy Shield”) and other international privacy agreements.

SecurTest, Inc. (“SecurTest”) reached a settlement agreement with the FTC over allegations that it falsely claimed to participate in the Privacy Shield. As part of the proposed settlement, SecurTest, which has since completed the steps necessary to participate in the Privacy Shield, is prohibited from misrepresenting its participation in any privacy or security program sponsored by a government, self-regulatory or standard-setting organization. The proposed settlement agreement will be published in the Federal Register and subject to public comment for 30 days, after which the FTC will make a determination regarding whether to make the proposed consent order final.

The FTC also reported that it sent warning letters to 13 companies for claiming to participate in the U.S.-EU and U.S.-Swiss Safe Harbor frameworks and to two companies for falsely claiming to participate in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Cross-Border Privacy Rules (the “APEC CBPR”) system. The Safe Harbor frameworks, which were replaced by the Privacy Shield frameworks in 2016, are no longer in force and all self-certifications under the Safe Harbor agreements have expired.

The FTC requested that the 13 companies remove from their websites, privacy policies or public documents any statements claiming participation in either of the Safe Harbor frameworks, and requested that the two companies either (1) remove from their websites, privacy policies, or other public documents any statements that might be construed as claiming participation or involvement in the APEC CBPR system or (2) prove that they had undergone the requisite review and certification.

You May Also Be Interested In

Time 2 Minute Read

On April 1, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held that the 2024 amendment to Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act, limiting damages, applies retroactively to pending cases.

Time 3 Minute Read

The Connecticut Attorney General recently issued a legal memorandum regarding the application of existing Connecticut laws, such as the Connecticut Data Privacy Act, to the use of artificial intelligence.

Time 3 Minute Read

On March 20, 2026, Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt signed SB 546 into law, enacting the Oklahoma Consumer Data Privacy Act, which will take effect on January 1, 2027.

Time 3 Minute Read

The results are in: attorneys are filing more employment law cases in court.  Indeed, year-end reporting from legal databases like LexMachina confirm that the pace of filing new employment discrimination cases reached its highest level in 2025, surpassing 20,000 new filings nationwide.  Though overtime and minimum wage lawsuits under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) have continued to decline since 2015, discrimination cases under laws like Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Americans with Disabilities Act are on the rise.

Search

Subscribe Arrow

Recent Posts

Categories

Tags

Archives

Jump to Page