Privacy & Information Security Law Blog

On July 22, 2024, Google announced that the company is scrapping its plans to phase out the use of third-party cookies in its Chrome browser. Google previously announced plans in 2020 to phase out third-party cookies, a digital advertising tool that tracks consumers’ Internet activity across websites. The company intended to replace third-party cookies with privacy-protective APIs through its Privacy Sandbox initiative.

On July 22, 2024, Google announced that the company had scrapped its plan to phase out the use of third-party cookies in its Chrome browser.

Earlier this month, the Federal Trade Commission, International Consumer Protection and Enforcement Network and Global Privacy Enforcement Network announced the results of a comprehensive review regarding the use of “dark patterns.”

On March 7, 2024, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) issued its judgment in the case of IAB Europe (Case C‑604/22). In this judgment, the CJEU assessed the role of the Interactive Advertising Bureau Europe (“IAB Europe”) in the processing operations associated with its Transparency and Consent Framework (“TCF”) and further developed CJEU case law on the concept of personal data under the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”).

On January 22, 2024, a draft of the final text of the EU Artificial Intelligence Act (“AI Act”) was leaked to the public. The leaked text substantially diverges from the original proposal by the European Commission, which dates back to 2021. The AI Act includes elements from both the European Parliament’s and the Council’s proposals.

On November 8, 2023, the Network Advertising Initiative (“NAI”) issued its best practices guidance (“Guidance”), which advocates for the use of demographic data for health advertising, rather than sensitive health information.

On September 7, 2023, Lina M. Khan, Chair of the Federal Trade Commission, announced that the FTC will hold an open meeting virtually at 11 am ET on Thursday, September 14, 2023.  The agenda of the open meeting includes a vote by the FTC on whether to release a staff perspective and recommendations on the blurring of advertising and content on digital media and its effects on children and teens.

On September 6, 2023, the European Commission designated six companies as gatekeepers under Article 3 of the Digital Markets Act (“DMA”). The new gatekeepers are Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, ByteDance, Meta and Microsoft. Jointly, these companies provide 22 core platform services, including social networks, internet browsers, operating systems and mobile app stores.

On August 14, 2023, the Federal Trade Commission announced a proposed order against Experian Consumer Services (“Experian”) for failure to comply with the federal CAN-SPAM Act.  The complaint alleges that Experian sent marketing emails that did not provide an unsubscribe opportunity to consumers who had signed up for Experian’s credit monitoring services. The CAN-SPAM Act requires businesses to, in relevant part, clearly and conspicuously display a return email address or Internet-based mechanism that allows consumers to unsubscribe from future marketing emails. While the Experian emails contained a notice stating that the messages related to the consumer’s Experian account (which would make them “transactional” or “relationship” messages under the CAN-SPAM Act, and therefore exempt from the unsubscribe requirement), the complaint alleged that, in actuality, the emails contained only marketing material.

On June 13, 2023, Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed H.B. 18, or the Securing Children Online through Parental Empowerment (“SCOPE”) Act that would impose obligations on digital service providers to protect minors.

On June 13, 2023, Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed H.B. 18, or the Securing Children Online through Parental Empowerment (“SCOPE”) Act that would require digital service providers to get parental consent to create an account with minors younger than 18 years of age.  

On May 24, 2023 Google LLC (“Google”) announced its recently updated privacy terms providing that, for many of Google’s advertising services, it will no longer act as a service provider for the purposes of the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 (“CPRA”). The change may affect businesses’ prior determinations of whether they “sell” personal information under the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (“CCPA”). The updated terms take effect on July 1, 2023, the day CPRA enforcement begins.

On May 22, 2023, the Federal Trade Commission announced a proposed order against education technology provider Edmodo, LLC (“Edmodo”) for violations of the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule (“COPPA Rule”) and Section 5 of the FTC Act.

On March 16, 2023, the Federal Trade Commission announced it issued orders to eight social media and video streaming platforms seeking Special Reports on how the platforms review and monitor commercial advertising to detect, prevent and reduce deceptive advertisements, including those related to fraudulent healthcare products, financial scams and the sale of fake goods. The FTC sent the orders pursuant to its resolution directing the FTC to use all available compulsory process to inquire into this topic, and using the FTC’s Section 6(b) authority, which authorizes the FTC to conduct studies that do not have a specific law enforcement purpose.

On March 2, 2023, the FTC announced a proposed order against BetterHelp, Inc., an online mental health counseling service, for sharing consumer data, including sensitive mental health information, with third parties for targeted advertising and other purposes. The FTC’s proposed order is notable, in that it is the first such order that would return funds to consumers whose health data was affected.

On February 1, 2023, the Federal Trade Commission announced that it entered into a proposed order with GoodRx, a telehealth and prescription drug discount provider, for violations of the FTC’s Health Breach Notification Rule stemming from GoodRx’s unauthorized disclosures of consumers’ personal health information to third party advertisers and other companies. This is the first enforcement action taken under the FTC’s Health Breach Notification Rule, which was issued in 2009.

On January 11, 2023, the Belgian Data Protection Authority (“Belgian DPA”) announced that it has approved the Interactive Advertising Bureau Europe’s (“IAB Europe”) action plan with respect to its Transparency and Consent Framework (“TCF”).

On November 1, 2022, the Digital Markets Act (the “DMA”) entered into force. The DMA introduces new rules for certain core platforms services acting as “gatekeepers” in the digital sector (including search engines, social networks, online advertising services, cloud computing, video-sharing services, messaging services, operating systems and online intermediation services). The DMA also aims to prevent such platforms from imposing unfair conditions on businesses and consumers, and to ensure the openness of important digital services.

On September 23, 2022, New York State Senator Andrew Gounardes introduced S9563, also known as the “New York Child Data Privacy and Protection Act.” The bill, which resembles the recently passed California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act, bans certain data collection and targeted advertising and requires data controllers to, among other obligations, assess the impact of their products on children.

On October 13, 2022, the Interactive Advertising Bureau (“IAB”) released for public comment an updated version of its contractual framework and new U.S. State Signals (“Signals”) specifications to help the digital advertising industry comply with the comprehensive state privacy laws of California, Virginia, Colorado, Utah and Connecticut.

On September 21, 2022, the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) announced a proposed combined fine of $3.4 million against Sinclair Broadcast Group, Nexstar Media Group and 19 other broadcast television licensees for violations of rules limiting commercial matter in children's television programming.

On September 21, 2022, the Federal Trade Commission announced the agenda for its “Protecting Kids from Stealth Advertising in Digital Media” virtual event to be held on October 19, 2022. The event will cover how children recognize and understand digital advertising content; the current advertising landscape’s impact on kids, including potential harms stemming from an inability to distinguish advertising from other content; and an assessment of the current legal regime’s protection of children from potential harms, and whether additional regulatory, self-regulatory, educational and technological tools may provide additional protection.

On September 15, 2022, the Federal Trade Commission released a report analyzing “dark patterns,” or “design practices that trick or manipulate users into making choices they would not otherwise have made and that may cause harm.” The report, titled “Bringing Dark Patterns to Light,” highlights dark patterns used across industries and different contexts, such as e-commerce, cookie consent banners, children’s apps and subscription sales. The report identifies four common types of dark patterns and provides examples of each:

On August 29, 2022, the Federal Trade Commission announced a civil action against digital marketing data broker Kochava Inc. for “selling geolocation data from hundreds of millions of mobile devices that can be used to trace the movements of individuals to and from sensitive locations.” The lawsuit seeks a permanent injunction to stop Kochava’s sale of geolocation data and to require the company to delete the geolocation data it has collected.  

On September 15, 2022, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law the California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act (the “Act”). The Act, which takes effect July 1, 2024, places new legal obligations on companies with respect to online products and services that are “likely to be accessed by children” under the age of 18.

On August 10, 2022, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) issued a new interpretive rule clarifying when digital marketing providers must comply with federal consumer financial protection law. Under the new rule, Big Tech companies that use behavioral advertising techniques to market financial products will be subject to the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 (“CFPA”).

On August 23, 2022, the Federal Trade Commission announced it is seeking additional public comment on “how children are affected by digital advertising and marketing messages that may blur the line between ads and entertainment” in conjunction with its “Protecting Kids from Stealth Advertising in Digital Media” event on October 19, 2022. The event will focus on manipulative marketing practices targeted towards children, particularly those related to influencer marketing and online games.

On April 23, 2022, the European Commission announced that the European Parliament and EU Member States had reached consensus on the Digital Services Act (“DSA”), which establishes accountability standards for online platforms regarding illegal and harmful content.

On April 19, 2022, the California state legislature and an industry self-regulatory group each separately took steps to enhance online privacy protections for children who are not covered by the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (“COPPA”), which applies only to personal information collected online from children under the age of 13.

On March 24, 2022, the European Union unveiled the final text of the Digital Markets Act (the “DMA”). The final text of the DMA was reached following trilogue negotiations between the European Commission, European Parliament and EU Member States (led by the French Presidency at the European Council). The final text retains essentially the same features as the previous draft text but does include some notable changes.

On February 2, 2022, the Litigation Chamber of the Belgian Data Protection Authority (the “Belgian DPA”) imposed a €250,000 fine against the Interactive Advertising Bureau Europe (“IAB Europe”) for several alleged infringements of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (the “GDPR”), following an investigation into IAB Europe Transparency and Consent Framework (“TCF”).

On December 27, 2021, the Federal Trade Commission sought public comment on a petition filed by Accountable Tech calling on the FTC to use its rulemaking authority to prohibit “surveillance advertising” as an “unfair method of competition” (“UMC”). Accountable Tech is a non-profit organization that advocates for social media companies to strengthen the integrity of their platforms.

On December 15, 2021, the European Parliament adopted its position on the proposal for a Digital Markets Act (“DMA”), ahead of negotiations with the Council of the European Union.

The DMA introduces new rules for certain core platforms services acting as “gatekeepers,” (including search engines, social networks, online advertising services, cloud computing, video-sharing services, messaging services, operating systems and online intermediation services) in the digital sector and aims to prevent them from imposing unfair conditions on businesses and consumers and to ensure the openness of important digital services.

On December 15, 2021, the Federal Trade Commission announced a $2 million settlement with OpenX Technologies (“OpenX”) in connection with alleged violations of the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act Rule (“COPPA Rule”) and the FTC Act. According to the FTC’s complaint, OpenX knowingly collected personal information from children under age 13 without parental consent, and collected geolocation data from users of all ages who opted out of being tracked.

On November 5, 2021, IAB Europe (“IAB EU”) announced that, in the coming weeks, the Belgian Data Protection Authority plans to share with other data protection authorities a draft ruling on the IAB EU Transparency & Consent Framework (“TCF”). The TCF is a GDPR consent solution built by IAB EU that has become a widely used approach to collecting consent to cookies under the GDPR. The draft ruling is expected to find that the TCF does not comply with the GDPR, in part because IAB EU acts as a controller, and the digital signals the TCF creates to capture individuals’ consent to cookies are personal data under the GDPR. Because IAB EU does not consider itself a controller with respect to the TCF, it does not currently comply with the GDPR’s controller obligations.

The FTC will hold a virtual open meeting on Thursday, October 21, 2021, at 1pm ET to present the agency’s findings on evidence gathered pursuant to the FTC’s issuance of 6(b) orders in 2019 to six Internet Service Providers and three of their advertising affiliates regarding the parties’ privacy practices. Public release of the FTC Staff report is subject to a vote by the Commission. The presentation of findings will be followed by a verbal public comment period where commenters can share feedback on the FTC’s work and bring matters to the Commission’s attention ...

The Irish Data Protection Commissioner (“DPC”) has submitted a draft decision on Facebook Ireland Limited’s (“Facebook”) data protection compliance to other European regulators under the cooperation mechanism of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) (the “Draft Decision”). The DPC proposes a fine between €28 and €36 million (i.e., up to $42 million) for infringements of the transparency obligations under the GDPR, specifically with respect to the legal basis upon which Facebook relied. In addition, the Draft Decision proposes imposing an order on Facebook to bring its terms of service and Data Policy into compliance within three months. However, the DPC indicates in its Draft Decision that Facebook is permitted to rely on contractual necessity as a legal basis for its personalized advertising, taking the view that this constitutes a core element of Facebook’s service.

On August 25, 2021, New Mexico Attorney General (“AG”) Hector Balderas sued Rovio Entertainment (“Rovio” or the “Company”), the developer of the popular Angry Birds mobile app games, alleging that the Company violated the federal Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (“COPPA”) by knowingly collecting data from players under age 13 and sharing it with advertisers. Under COPPA, developers of child-directed apps are required to provide notice to parents of their data collection practices and obtain verifiable parental consent to collect personal information from children under 13.

The Children’s Advertising Review Unit (“CARU”), a part of a part of the Better Business Bureau National Programs (“BBBNP”), released its revised Children’s Advertising Guidelines (the “Guidelines”) earlier this month. The Guidelines, which contain some notable changes, will go into effect in January 2022.

On August 20, 2021, China’s 13^th Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress passed the Personal Information Protection Law (the “PIPL”). As we previously reported, the PIPL is China’s first comprehensive data protection law. It is modeled, in part, on other jurisdictions’ omnibus data protection regimes, including the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”). The PIPL will become effective on November 1, 2021. Below are some of the key provisions under the PIPL.

On July 29, 2021, U.S. Representative Rep. Kathy Castor (D-Florida), a member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, reintroduced the Protecting the Information of our Vulnerable Children and Youth Act (the “Bill”). The Bill would update the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (“COPPA”) to, among other requirements: (1) cover teens ages 13-17; (2) expand the categories of information considered to be “personal” (to include physical characteristics, biometric information, health information, education information, contents of messages and calls, browsing and search history, geolocation information, and latent audio or visual recordings); (3) prohibit companies from targeting online advertising to children and teens based on their personal information and behavior; (4) require opt-in consent to process personal information collected from all individuals under age 18; (5) strengthen Federal Trade Commission enforcement of COPPA; (6) provide a private right of action to parents of children and teens; and (7) eliminate the FTC’s recognition of self-regulatory COPPA safe harbor programs.

On July 16, 2021, the Luxembourg data protection authority (Commission nationale pour la protection des donées, “CNPD”) imposed a record-breaking €746 million fine on Amazon Europe Core S.à.r.l. for alleged violations of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”). The CNPD also ordered Amazon to revise certain of its practices. As Amazon has its EU headquarters in Luxembourg, the CNPD acts as Amazon’s lead supervisory authority in the EU.

On July 1, 2021, the Federal Trade Commission settled a complaint brought under the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (“COPPA”) against Toronto-based Kuuhuub Inc. and its Finnish subsidiaries Kuu Hubb Oy and Recolor Oy, operators of the online coloring book app, Recolor. The FTC alleged that the app operators violated the COPPA Rule by collecting and disclosing personal information from child users of the app without first notifying their parents or obtaining verifiable parental consent.

On June 24, 2021, Google announced that it will delay its plan to replace the use of third-party cookies on its Chrome web browser with new technologies. This delay comes amid antitrust and privacy concerns, as well as scrutiny from the advertising industry that the changes will strengthen Google’s own advertising business.

On May 11, 2021, Senators Edward Markey (D-MA) and Bill Cassidy (R-LA) introduced the Children and Teens’ Online Privacy Protection Act (the “Bill”). The Bill, which would amend the existing Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (“COPPA”), would prohibit companies from collecting personal information from children ages 13 to 15 without their consent.

On December 14, 2020, the Federal Trade Commission announced that it had issued orders to nine social media and video streaming companies, requesting information on how the companies collect, use and present personal information, their advertising and user engagement practices and how their practices affect children and teens. The orders will assist the FTC in conducting a study of these policies, practices and procedures. The FTC issued the orders pursuant to Section 6(b) of the FTC Act, which allows the agency to undertake broad studies separate from its law enforcement activities.

On September 7, 2020, the European Data Protection Board (the “EDPB”) published Guidelines on the Targeting of Social Media Users (the “Guidelines”). The Guidelines aim to provide practical guidance on the role and responsibilities of social media providers and those using targeting services, such as for targeted advertising, on social media platforms (“targeters”).

On January 8, 2020, the Information Commissioner's Office (“ICO”) launched a consultation on its draft direct marketing code of practice (the “Draft Code”), as required by section 122 of the Data Protection Act 2018 (“DPA 18”). The Draft Code is open for public consultation until March 4, 2020.

On October 21, 2019, the Federal Trade Commission took action against two companies alleged to have engaged in the business of false online reviews and social media influence. In the first case, the FTC entered into a consent decree with cosmetics marketer Sunday Riley, LLC, and the company’s owner, who sell products at Sephora stores and online at Sephora.com. According to the FTC’s complaint, disguised as ordinary consumers, Sunday Riley employees and Ms. Riley herself posted fake 5-star reviews of the company’s products on Sephora’s website. Under the terms of the FTC’s agreement, the company and its principal are barred from posting fake reviews, must clearly identify endorsers, and must instruct staff on their disclosure obligations. The FTC vote on the action was 3-2, with Commissioners Chopra and Slaughter dissenting on the grounds that the settlement did not include a monetary payment or an admission of guilt.

On October 2, 2019, the UK Court of Appeal handed down its judgment on the appeal in Richard Lloyd v. Google LLC, in which Richard Lloyd, a consumer protection advocate, seeks to bring a representative action on behalf of four million Apple iPhone users against Google LLC in the United States. Previously, the High Court had refused to grant permission for the proceedings to be served outside the UK. The Court of Appeal reversed the High Court’s judgment, granting permission for service outside the UK and allowing the representative action to proceed. The judgment is significant as it paves the way for representative actions (equivalent to class actions) for data protection infringements in the UK.

Simon McDougall, Executive Director for Technology Policy and Innovation for the UK Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”), has stated that “change is needed” in the adtech sector. In a speech delivered on July 11, 2019, at the Westminster Media Forum, focusing on the future of online advertising regulation, McDougall commented that “heads are still firmly in the sand” in some pockets of the digital advertising industry, and that many real-time bidding practices are currently being conducted in an unlawful manner, whether or not industry players are aware of it.

On June 28, 2019, the French data protection authority (the “CNIL”) published its action plan for 2019-2020 to specify the rules applicable to online targeted advertising and to support businesses in their compliance efforts.

The UK Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”) recently published an updated report on adtech, following a Fact Finding Forum held in March 2019 and consultation with industry players. The report focuses on whether and how organizations in the adtech sector can comply with the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) and the UK’s implementation of the e-Privacy Directive, known as the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations (“PECR”).

On February 12, 2019, the Federal Trade Commission announced the completion of the first regulatory review of the Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing Act (“CAN-SPAM”) Rule (the “CAN-SPAM Rule” or “Rule”). By a vote of 5-0, the FTC voted to retain the CAN-SPAM rule with no modifications.

On November 30, 2018, the Austrian Data Protection Authority (“DPA”) published a decision in response to a complaint received from an individual regarding the cookie consent options offered on an Austrian newspaper’s website. As a factual matter, the Austrian newspaper offered three options to individuals who sought to access content on the site: (1) accept the use of cookies for analytics and advertising purposes and have full, complimentary website access; (2) refuse cookies and obtain access to only limited content on the website; or (3) pay a monthly subscription of €6 to obtain full access to the website without accepting the use of cookies and similar tracking technologies.

On October 17, 2018, the French data protection authority (the “CNIL”) published a press release detailing the rules applicable to devices that compile aggregated and anonymous statistics from personal data—for example, mobile phone identifiers (i.e., media access control or “MAC” address) —for purposes such as measuring advertising audience in a given space and analyzing flow in shopping malls and other public areas. Read the press release (in French).

On July 12, 2018, two U.S. Senators sent a letter to the Federal Trade Commission asking the agency to investigate the privacy policies and practices of smart TV manufacturers. In their letter, Senators Edward Markey (D-MA) and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) note that smart TVs can “compile detailed profiles about users’ preferences and characteristics” which can then allow companies to personalize ads to be sent to “customers’ computers, phones or any other device that shares the smart TV’s internet connection.”

On April 4, 2017, the Massachusetts Attorney General’s office announced a settlement with Copley Advertising LLC (“Copley”) in a case involving geofencing.

On February 6, 2017, the FTC announced that it has agreed to settle charges that VIZIO, Inc. (“VIZIO”), installed software on about 11 million consumer televisions to collect viewing data without consumers’ knowledge or consent. The stipulated federal court order requires VIZIO to pay $2.2 million to the FTC and New Jersey Division of Consumer Affairs. 

On December 20, 2016, the FTC announced that it has agreed to settle charges that Turn Inc. (“Turn”), a company that enables commercial brands and ad agencies to target digital advertising to consumers, tracked consumers online even after consumers took steps to opt out of tracking.

On November 30, 2016, the FTC released a staff summary (the “Summary”) of a public workshop called Putting Disclosures to the Test. The workshop, which was held on September 15, 2016, examined ways of testing and evaluating company disclosures regarding advertising claims and privacy practices. The Summary reviews the workshop and its key takeaways.

Late last year the Federal Trade Commission issued enforcement guidance on “native advertising” — ads that purposely are formatted to appear as noncommercial and are integrated into surrounding editorial content. The agency’s guidance took two parts: an Enforcement Policy Statement on deceptively formatted ads, and a Guide for Business on native advertising. These long-awaited guidance documents follow on the FTC’s December 2013 “Blurred Lines” workshop on native advertising. Importantly, the FTC notes that its policy statement does not apply just to advertisers but also to other parties that help create the content: ad agencies, ad networks and potentially, publishers.

On December 17, 2015, the Federal Trade Commission announced that LifeLock, Inc. (“LifeLock”) has agreed to pay $100 million to settle contempt charges for deceptive advertising. According to the FTC, “[t]his is the largest monetary award obtained by the Commission in an order enforcement action.” Under the terms of the settlement, $68 million of the settlement amount will be paid to class action consumers who were injured by the identity theft protection company’s violation of a 2010 settlement with the FTC that required LifeLock to protect consumer information. The rest of the money will be used for settlements with state attorneys general, and any remaining money will go to the FTC. The case is Federal Trade Commission v. LifeLock Inc., et al. (2:10-cv-00530), in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona.

Hunton & Williams welcomes Phyllis H. Marcus as counsel to the firm’s privacy and competition teams. Phyllis joins the firm from the Federal Trade Commission, where she held a number of leadership positions, most recently as Chief of Staff of the Division of Advertising Practices. Phyllis led the FTC’s children’s online privacy program, including bringing a number of enforcement actions and overhauling the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (“COPPA”) Rule. She offers the privacy team a keen understanding of the complexities of the revised regulations, as well as broader issues relating to student privacy, mobile applications and the Internet of Things.

On July 10, 2015, the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) released a Declaratory Ruling and Order that provides guidance with respect to several sections of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”). The Declaratory Ruling and Order responds to 21 separate requests from industry, government and others seeking clarifications regarding the TCPA and related FCC rules.

On May 7, 2015, the Digital Advertising Alliance (“DAA”) announced that, as of September 1, 2015, the Council of Better Business Bureaus and the Direct Marketing Association will begin to enforce the DAA Self-Regulatory Principles for Online Behavioral Advertising and the Multi-Site Data Principles (collectively, the “Self-Regulatory Principles”) in the mobile environment.

On November 16, 2015, the Federal Trade Commission will host a workshop in Washington, D.C., to examine the benefits and privacy risks associated with “cross-device tracking.” The workshop intends to highlight the types of cross-device tracking techniques and how businesses and consumers can benefit from these practices. The workshop also will address related privacy and security risks, and discuss whether self-regulatory programs apply to these practices.

On February 26, 2015, the Department of Education’s Privacy Technical Assistance Center (“PTAC”) issued guidance to assist schools, school districts and vendors with understanding the primary laws regulating student privacy and how compliance with those laws may be affected by Terms of Service (“TOS”) offered by providers of online educational services and mobile applications. The guidance also is intended to aid school districts and schools in implementing separate guidance issued by the PTAC in February 2014. The guidance was accompanied by a short training video directed to teachers, administrators and other relevant staff.

On October 14, 2014, rent-to-own retailer Aaron’s, Inc. (“Aaron’s”) entered into a $28.4 million settlement with the California Office of the California Attorney General related to charges that the company permitted its franchised stores to unlawfully monitor their customers’ leased laptops.

On May 27, 2014, the Federal Trade Commission announced the release of a new report entitled Data Brokers: A Call for Transparency and Accountability, detailing the findings of an FTC study of nine data brokers, representing a cross-section of the industry. The Report concludes that the data broker industry needs greater transparency and recommends that Congress consider enacting legislation that would make data brokers’ practices more visible and give consumers more control over the collection and sharing of their personal information.

On May 19, 2014, the Federal Communications Commission announced that Sprint Corporation agreed to pay $7.5 million to settle an FCC Enforcement Bureau investigation stemming from allegations that the company failed to honor consumers’ requests to opt out of telemarketing calls and texts. Sprint also agreed to implement a two-year plan to help ensure future compliance with Do-Not-Call registry rules.

On December 10, 2013, a German data protection working group on advertising and address trading published new guidelines on the collection, processing and use of personal data for advertising purposes (the “Guidelines”). The working group was established by the committee of German data protection authorities (“DPAs”) and is chaired by the Bavarian DPA. The first set of guidelines were published in November 2012.

On December 2, 2013, the Federal Trade Commission announced that it will host a series of seminars to examine the privacy implications of three new areas of technology used to track, market to and analyze consumers: mobile device tracking, predictive scoring and consumer-generated health data. The seminars will address (1) businesses tracking consumers using signals from the consumers’ mobile devices, (2) the use of predictive scoring to determine consumers’ access to products and offers, and (3) consumer-generated information provided to non-HIPAA covered websites and apps. The FTC stated that the intention of the seminars is to bring attention to new trends in big data and their impact on consumer privacy.

On October 16, 2013, the Federal Communications Commission’s revisions to its Telephone Consumer Protection Act rules go into effect. As we previously reported, the revisions require that businesses obtain “express written consent” prior to advertising or telemarketing through (1) autodialed calls or text messages, or prerecorded calls to consumers’ mobile numbers, and (2) prerecorded calls to consumers’ residential lines. In addition, the FCC’s revisions eliminate the exemption that allowed businesses to place prerecorded advertising or telemarketing calls to a consumer’s residential phone line if the business had a pre-existing business relationship with the consumer.

On September 25, 2013, Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), Chair of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, expanded his investigation of the data broker industry by asking twelve popular health and personal finance websites to answer questions about their data collection and sharing practices.

On September 26, 2013, the UK Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”) published new breach notification guidance (the “Guidance”), applicable to telecom operators, Internet service providers (“ISPs”) and other public electronic communications service (“ECS”) providers.

On August 26, 2013, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California approved a settlement with Facebook, Inc., related to the company’s alleged misappropriation of certain Facebook members’ personal information, such as names and profile pictures, that was then used in ads to promote products and services via Facebook’s “Sponsored Stories” program.

On July 26, 2013, the Federal Trade Commission announced updates to its frequently asked questions regarding the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998 (“COPPA”). The updated FAQs, which have replaced the June 2013 version on the FTC’s Business Center website, provide additional information in the sections addressing websites and online services directed to children and disclosure of information to third parties.

Senior Attorney Rosemary Jay reports from London:

On June 25, 2013, Advocate-General Jääskinen of the European Court of Justice (“ECJ”) delivered his Opinion in Google Spain S.L. and Google Inc. v Agencia Española de Protección de Datos (Case C-131/12, “Google v AEPD” or the “case”).

The case concerns Google Search results, and whether individuals have a right to erasure of search result links about them. The Opinion concludes that under current law, individuals have no such right. The European Commission’s proposed General Data Protection Regulation (the “Proposed Regulation”) would introduce a right to be forgotten. However, this Opinion appears to demonstrate unease with the basic concept of such a right.

On May 20, 2013, the Estonian Data Protection Inspectorate issued its Annual Report 2012 (the “Report,” summary available in English). The number of inquiries, complaints and supervision proceedings have remained the same over the last few years. The main topics of complaints include employment relations, CCTV, electronic direct marketing and social media. The Inspectorate stated that its primary goal is to stop violations of the law, not to impose sanctions. According to the Report, the Inspectorate issued orders regarding compliance in 48 cases and imposed fines in 39 cases.

On April 30, 2013, the regional court of Berlin enjoined Apple Sales International, which is based in Ireland, (“Apple”) from relying on eight of its existing standard data protection clauses in contracts with customers based in Germany. The court also prohibited Apple’s future use of such clauses.

On May 6, 2013, the Federal Trade Commission announced that it had voted unanimously to reject a request from industry groups to delay the July 1, 2013 deadline for implementation of the updated Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule (the “Rule”). The groups had argued that the delay was necessary because they needed more time to comply with the changes to the Rule, which the FTC promulgated on December 19, 2012. In its response to the groups, the FTC asserted that the groups have been on notice of the changes since the beginning of the rulemaking process over three years ago, and ...

On April 22, 2013, the higher administrative court of Schleswig issued two decisions rejecting an appeal by the data protection authority of Schleswig-Holstein (“Schleswig DPA”) that sought to challenge a lower court’s earlier rulings in Facebook’s favor.

On April 2, 2013, the Article 29 Working Party (the “Working Party”) adopted an Opinion (the “Opinion”) that elaborates on the purpose limitation principle set out in Article 6(1)(b) of the current EU Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC (the “Data Protection Directive”). The Opinion analyzes the scope of this principle under the Data Protection Directive, clarifies its limits and makes recommendations to strengthen it in the proposed General Data Protection Regulation (the “Proposed Regulation”). It also focuses on how to apply this principle in the context of Big Data and open data.

Internet users have expressed increasing concern about efforts to track their online activities. As the online tracking methods used to target advertisements have expanded in both scope and complexity, regulators have taken notice and have begun to act in the online behavioral tracking and advertising space. In an article published in the November/December 2012 issue of IP Litigator, Lisa J. Sotto, partner and head of the Global Privacy and Data Security practice at Hunton & Williams LLP, and Melinda L. McLellan, a senior associate on the firm’s Privacy and Data Security team ...

On December 18, 2012, the Federal Trade Commission issued Orders to File Special Report (the “Orders”) to nine data brokerage companies, seeking information about how these companies collect and use personal data about consumers. In the Orders, the FTC requests detailed information about the data brokers’ privacy practices, including:

• the data brokerage companies’ online and offline products and services that use personal data;
• the sources and types of personal data the data brokerage companies collect;
• whether, and how, the companies acquire consumer consent before obtaining, collecting, generating, deriving, disseminating or storing the personal data;
• whether, and how, the personal data is aggregated, anonymized or de-identified;
• how the companies monitor, audit or evaluate the accuracy of the personal data they obtain;
• if, and how, consumers are able to access, correct, delete or opt out of the collection, use or sharing of the personal data the data brokerage companies maintain about the consumers;
• how the data brokerage companies provide notice to consumers about their data privacy practices;
• the advertisements or promotional materials the companies use to describe their products and services; and
• information about any complaints or disputes, or governmental or regulatory inquiries or actions, related to the companies’ data privacy practices.

On December 19, 2012, the Federal Trade Commission announced the adoption of its long-awaited amendments to the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule (the “Rule”). The FTC implemented the Rule, which became effective on April 21, 2000, pursuant to provisions in the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998 (“COPPA”).

On November 23, 2012, a German data protection working group on advertising and address trading published guidelines (in German) on the collection, processing and use of personal data for advertising purposes (the “Guidelines”). The working group was established by the committee of German data protection authorities (“DPAs”) and is chaired by the Bavarian DPA.

On December 5, 2012, the Federal Trade Commission announced that the online advertising company Epic Marketplace, Inc. (“Epic”) agreed to settle charges that it engaged in “history sniffing” to secretly and illegally collect information about consumers’ interest in sensitive medical and financial issues. History sniffing is the practice of determining whether a consumer has previously visited a webpage by checking how a browser displays a hyperlink. The consent order requires Epic to destroy all data collected from history sniffing and bars Epic from engaging in history sniffing in the future.

On November 27, 2012, the International Chamber of Commerce of the United Kingdom (“ICC UK”) released the second edition of its cookie guidance (the “Guidance”). The ICC UK released the first edition of the Guidance in April of this year, and has produced this latest version to take into account updated guidance released by the UK Information Commissioner’s Office (“ICO”), the Article 29 Working Party Opinion 04/2012 on cookie consent exemption and new UK advertising rules on online behavioral advertising.

On November 19, 2012, 40 German advertising associations launched the “German Data Protection Council for Online Advertising,” a new initiative to coordinate and enforce self-regulation in the German online behavioral advertising (“OBA”) sector. The initiative is linked to the European Interactive Digital Advertising Alliance (“EDAA”), which manages the self-regulation efforts of the European online advertising industry.

In a joint-agency media conference and press release with the Federal Trade Commission today, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) used the “rulemaking-through-enforcement” method of regulation to create several de-facto guidelines for what is “unfair, deceptive, or abusive” in mortgage advertising. Bypassing the more arduous rulemaking process, the CFPB published “sample warning letters” that effectively made the following advertising practices illegal:

As of September 1, 2012, all personal data in Germany may only be processed and used for marketing purposes (including address trading) with the express opt-in consent of the affected individuals. Furthermore, the consent language must have been specifically drawn to the attention of the relevant individual as part of the terms and conditions governing the use of his or her personal data.

On August 10, 2012, a federal district court in California denied Hulu’s motion to dismiss the remaining claim in a putative class action suit alleging that the online streaming video provider transmitted users’ personal information to third parties in violation of the Video Privacy Protection Act (“VPPA”). The VPPA prohibits a “video tape service provider” from transmitting personally identifiable information of “consumers,” except in certain, limited circumstances. According to the complaint, Hulu allegedly allowed KISSmetrics, a data analytics company, to place tracking codes on the plaintiffs’ computers that re-spawned previously-deleted cookies, and shared Hulu users’ video viewing choices and “personally identifiable information” with third parties, including online ad networks, metrics companies and social media networks.

On August 1, 2012, the Federal Trade Commission announced that it is seeking public comments on additional proposed modifications to the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule (“COPPA Rule” or “Rule”). According to the FTC, the second-round revisions modify certain COPPA Rule definitions to “clarify the Rule’s scope and strengthen its protections for the online collection, use, or disclosure of children’s personal information.” The FTC developed these new definitions after reviewing the 350 public comments submitted in response to the Commission’s September 2011 proposal to amend the Rule.

On June 7, 2012, the Article 29 Working Party (the “Working Party”) adopted an Opinion analyzing the exemptions to the prior opt-in consent requirement for cookies. Although the Opinion focuses on cookies, the Working Party also notes that the same analysis applies to any technology allowing information to be stored or accessed on a user’s computer or mobile device.

The Digital Advertising Alliance (“DAA”) recently announced that its members will work “to add browser-based header signals to the set of tools by which consumers can express their preferences” not to be tracked online and will work with browser providers to develop “consistent language across browsers…that describes to consumers the effect of exercising such choice.”

This announcement came on the heels of the Obama administration’s release of a framework for a Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights. The DAA’s agreement represents the industry’s attempt to appease consumer privacy concerns in the face of the growth of online advertising. The DAA represents over 400 advertising and technology companies.

On January 5, 2012, the Federal Trade Commission announced a proposed settlement with Upromise, Inc., a membership reward service that gives cash rebates for college savings accounts to members who purchase products and services from its partner merchants. The FTC alleged that the “Personalized Offers” feature on the Upromise TurboSaver Toolbar (1) collected far more information about users’ browsing behavior than was disclosed at the time of installation, and (2) contrary to representations in the company’s privacy notice, transmitted that information, which included data such as Social Security numbers and financial account numbers, in clear text.

On December 8, 2011, the Article 29 Working Party (the “Working Party”) adopted an Opinion on the European Advertising Standards Alliance (“EASA”) and IAB Europe best practice recommendations for the online behavioral advertising (“OBA”) industry to comply with Article 5.3 of the revised e-Privacy Directive 2002/58/EC (the “cookie clause”). The cookie clause requires a user’s informed consent for the use of cookies and similar technologies that store and access information in the user’s terminal device. Finding practical ways of complying with the cookie clause has proven challenging for the OBA industry, which relies heavily on these kinds of tracking mechanisms.

This week, the Digital Advertising Alliance (the “DAA”) unveiled new “Self-Regulatory Principles for Multi-Site Data” (the “Principles”), aimed at expanding the scope of industry self-regulation with respect to online data collection. The Principles are designed to supplement the Self-Regulatory Principles for Online Behavioral Advertising which were issued in July 2009. The DAA is composed of several constituent industry groups such as the American Association of Advertising Agencies, Council of Better Business Bureaus, the Direct Marketing Association and the Interactive Advertising Bureau.