The Supreme Court debated the wisdom of directing Google’s $8.5 million data privacy settlement to charitable and academic organizations rather than to alleged victims (see 1805010051). During oral argument Wednesday in Frank v. Gaos (docket 17-961), Chief Justice John Roberts suggested Google could have awarded the money to organizations it hadn't contributed to in the past, alluding to criticisms from Ted Frank, litigation director for the Competitive Enterprise Institute, which challenged the settlement. New Justice Brett Kavanaugh asked whether it would be better to have a lottery or a pro rata system to ensure an injured party benefits. Justice Samuel Alito’s questioning suggested the deal awards a lot of money to attorneys, the class-action members get nothing, and groups potentially partial to Google benefit. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg suggested an indirect benefit outweighs what class members could have gotten. Frank told her each claiming class member “probably could have gotten between $5 and $10” with typical claims rates. Justice Sonia Sotomayor said of the settlement, “It seems like the system is working.” Google attorney Andrew Pincus said the question is whether the cost of distributing the money means the class gets essentially nothing, making an indirect benefit better.
The Supreme Court debated the wisdom of directing Google’s $8.5 million data privacy settlement to charitable and academic organizations rather than to alleged victims (see 1805010051). During oral argument Wednesday in Frank v. Gaos (docket 17-961), Chief Justice John Roberts suggested Google could have awarded the money to organizations it hadn't contributed to in the past, alluding to criticisms from Ted Frank, litigation director for the Competitive Enterprise Institute, which challenged the settlement. New Justice Brett Kavanaugh asked whether it would be better to have a lottery or a pro rata system to ensure an injured party benefits. Justice Samuel Alito’s questioning suggested the deal awards a lot of money to attorneys, the class-action members get nothing, and groups potentially partial to Google benefit. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg suggested an indirect benefit outweighs what class members could have gotten. Frank told her each claiming class member “probably could have gotten between $5 and $10” with typical claims rates. Justice Sonia Sotomayor said of the settlement, “It seems like the system is working.” Google attorney Andrew Pincus said the question is whether the cost of distributing the money means the class gets essentially nothing, making an indirect benefit better.
The Supreme Court debated the wisdom of directing Google’s $8.5 million data privacy settlement to charitable and academic organizations rather than to alleged victims (see 1805010051). During oral argument Wednesday in Frank v. Gaos (docket 17-961), Chief Justice John Roberts suggested Google could have awarded the money to organizations it hadn't contributed to in the past, alluding to criticisms from Ted Frank, litigation director for the Competitive Enterprise Institute, which challenged the settlement. New Justice Brett Kavanaugh asked whether it would be better to have a lottery or a pro rata system to ensure an injured party benefits. Justice Samuel Alito’s questioning suggested the deal awards a lot of money to attorneys, the class-action members get nothing, and groups potentially partial to Google benefit. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg suggested an indirect benefit outweighs what class members could have gotten. Frank told her each claiming class member “probably could have gotten between $5 and $10” with typical claims rates. Justice Sonia Sotomayor said of the settlement, “It seems like the system is working.” Google attorney Andrew Pincus said the question is whether the cost of distributing the money means the class gets essentially nothing, making an indirect benefit better.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., is the favorite to succeed Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, if Grassley replaces retiring Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, lobbyists and industry officials told us. Rep. Doug Collins, R-Ga., who scored legislative victories in 2018, is favored to succeed retiring House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va. Rep. Steve Chabot, R-Ohio, who holds seniority over Collins, also is said to be seeking the top GOP seat.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., is the favorite to succeed Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, if Grassley replaces retiring Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, lobbyists and industry officials told us. Rep. Doug Collins, R-Ga., who scored legislative victories in 2018, is favored to succeed retiring House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va. Rep. Steve Chabot, R-Ohio, who holds seniority over Collins, also is said to be seeking the top GOP seat.
The longer the FTC’s Facebook-Cambridge Analytica probe lasts (see 1808220030), the worse the outcome could be for Facebook, said former FTC Deputy Chief Trial Counsel Michael Kades Tuesday. “If you’re really going to try to hammer a company in a new way, you get your ducks in a row.” Kades at a New America Open Technology Institute event noted the agency is likely preparing for all possible rebuttals. “That the FTC hasn’t done anything on the Facebook [probe] yet, I don’t think that means anything," he said.
The longer the FTC’s Facebook-Cambridge Analytica probe lasts (see 1808220030), the worse the outcome could be for Facebook, said former FTC Deputy Chief Trial Counsel Michael Kades Tuesday. “If you’re really going to try to hammer a company in a new way, you get your ducks in a row.” Kades at a New America Open Technology Institute event noted the agency is likely preparing for all possible rebuttals. “That the FTC hasn’t done anything on the Facebook [probe] yet, I don’t think that means anything," he said.
The EU-U.S. Privacy Shield is working as intended, American software industry groups told us, and companies expect the program to be extended at the end of the current review, as do some in Europe (see 1810170028). A privacy advocate also expects extension but warned officials are avoiding the bigger issue -- lack of cohesion between U.S. and EU surveillance laws. Two other privacy advocates expect the FTC’s ongoing Facebook-Cambridge Analytica probe to heavily influence negotiations pending EU recommendations for the agreement.
The EU-U.S. Privacy Shield is working as intended, American software industry groups told us, and companies expect the program to be extended at the end of the current review, as do some in Europe (see 1810170028). A privacy advocate also expects extension but warned officials are avoiding the bigger issue -- lack of cohesion between U.S. and EU surveillance laws. Two other privacy advocates expect the FTC’s ongoing Facebook-Cambridge Analytica probe to heavily influence negotiations pending EU recommendations for the agreement.
Discussing the need for a federal privacy law, Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter cited the “real tools” the FTC gained from the children’s privacy law: specific rulemaking and civil penalty authorities. Granted under the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, those tools have been debated this Congress (see 1810110043). Children should be at the center of the legislative debate, said Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., in a video address. Slaughter spoke Wednesday at the Georgetown Institute for Tech Law & Policy (see 1810220041) and at that day’s FTC hearing (see 1810230042).