The FTC should compel information from technology, media and educational tech companies collecting children’s data, the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood and Center for Digital Democracy wrote the agency Thursday. Citing increased video streaming due to COVID-19, the groups said the agency should target AT&T, Comcast, Google, Zoom, Disney, Viacom and edtech companies Edmodo and Prodigy. The groups suggested the agency use 6(b) authority to do a study. A 6(b) study carries subpoena authority, allowing the commission to request nonpublic information. The letter, sent by the Institute for Public Representation at Georgetown Law, pertains to the agency’s review of the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (see 1912120062). The commission should avoid actions “that could undermine strong protections for children’s privacy without full information about a complex data collection ecosystem,” the groups wrote. An FTC spokesperson confirmed the agency received the request.
The FCC is soliciting nominations for a new advisory committee focused on stopping robocalls to hospitals, said a public notice Wednesday. The Hospital Robocall Protection Group will work to issue best practices for carriers to combat such calls, and how hospitals can protect themselves. It stems from the Traced Act. “Health care facilities are critically important, especially in the face of the current pandemic, and the last thing they should have to worry about is receiving robocalls that distract,” said FCC Chairman Ajit Pai. The group will have an equal number of representatives from hospitals, voice providers that serve hospitals, robocall mitigation companies, consumer groups, VoIP providers, state government officials, and one member each from the FCC and FTC. Best practices are expected to be issued within 180 days of the group’s establishment. Nominations are due “as soon as possible” but by May 1 (see the release).
Zoom claims the right to collect personal data, including videos and transcripts, and share it with third parties, Consumer Reports Senior Editor-Privacy Allen St. John blogged Tuesday. St. John raised the concerns in light of increased use of the video-conferencing service due to COVID-19. People aren’t expecting the information to be shared when they conference for therapy appointments, business meetings and job interviews, he said. The company didn’t comment.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals scheduled oral argument in a mass surveillance case involving AT&T customers for 9:30 a.m. June 5 in Seattle (see 1508050058). The Electronic Frontier Foundation filed the lawsuit in Jewel v. NSA (19-16066) in 2008 on behalf of San Francisco resident Carolyn Jewel and other Bay Area AT&T customers challenging NSA collection of their communications, citing Fourth Amendment protections.
A New York security and background check provider misrepresented its participation in Privacy Shield, the FTC alleged in a settlement Monday. T&M Protection Resources is prohibited from misrepresenting itself in the future, said commissioners 5-0. The company didn’t comment.
The FCC carried out a U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit finding that the agency lacks authority to require solicited faxes to include opt-out notices. The announcement came in an order Tuesday on docket 05-338. It dismissed petitions for reconsideration as moot (see 1904020012) since it considers the solicited fax rule unlawful. Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel concurred.
The South Korean parent company of LG Electronics filed Feb. 28 to register “8K Recording” as a U.S. trademark, Patent and Trademark Office records show. LG wants to use the mark commercially for a wide range of consumer devices, including smartphones, smartwatches and wireless headsets, said the application. LG touted the ability for its dual-screen V60 ThinQ 5G smartphone to capture video in “stunning 8K quality” when it announced the product Feb. 27, a day before the PTO application but made no mention of a feature formally called 8K Recording. LG’s headquarters in Seoul didn’t comment Monday.
The Washington legislature passed a facial recognition bill Thursday after failing to reach agreement on a comprehensive privacy bill (see 2003120035). The House-Senate conference committee’s second attempt at a compromise S-6280 covered only government and law enforcement usage, leaving rules on private usage for next session. “The agreement we reached is a sensible compromise,” said Rep. Debra Entenman (D), who earlier sought a moratorium on facial recognition technology. “This bill now provides adequate guardrails for this emerging technology. It will mandate community input in how facial recognition technology is used and ensure that any use by the government is thoroughly vetted.” The bill “isn’t perfect” but “creates accountability and guidelines for how this powerful technology is used,” said House Innovation, Technology and Economic Development Committee Chairman Zack Hudgins (D). Sponsor Sen. Joe Nguyen (D) tweeted, “Senate Bill 6280 is headed to” Gov. Jay Inslee (D) “for a signature!” The Electronic Frontier Foundation opposed the bill because it wants a moratorium on facial recognition technology, said EFF Legislative Activist Hayley Tsukayama. The proposed Washington Privacy Act (SB-6281) failed after lawmakers couldn’t agree on enforcement. The House wanted a private right of action; the Senate supported attorney general enforcement only. Hudgins was “disappointed that we were not able to find common ground on the issue of consumer-focused enforcement with the Senate after both sides moved on the underlying policy so much,” the House member said. “It is unfortunate that multiple reasonable alternatives that kept a consumer voice in the enforcement process were rejected.” The bill “would have provided consumers with the strong privacy rights they deserve while also putting obligations on companies to protect and safeguard their data,” said Microsoft Chief Privacy Officer Julie Brill. Her company, which supported the Senate’s view, hopes to “build upon our learnings here, to create comprehensive legislation that will provide needed protections for all of us.” EFF and American Civil Liberties Union officials opposed the privacy bill. “For privacy rights to be meaningful, they must not be undermined,” emailed ACLU-Washington Technology and Liberty Project Manager Jennifer Lee. EFF wanted a private right of action and “there were a lot of loopholes ... that we had serious concerns about,” said Tsukayama. She doesn’t expect the fight is over.
Senate Consumer Protection Subcommittee Chairman Jerry Moran, R-Kan., introduced privacy legislation Thursday that would pre-empt state laws. Moran was previously working with subcommittee ranking member Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., on potential bipartisan legislation (see 2003060044). Moran’s bill, the Consumer Data Privacy and Security Act, would let consumers access, correct and erase their personal data. It would bar companies from collecting data without consumer consent with “limited and specific exceptions.”
The House passed legislation 278-136 Wednesday that would end NSA’s call detail records program (see 2003100031). The chamber was considering amendments in the early evening. Sens. Mike Lee, R-Utah, and Rand Paul, R-Ky., plan to block the legislation, which revises and renews the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. It “doesn’t fix what’s wrong with FISA. It would not have stopped the spying that occurred against” President Donald Trump, Lee tweeted: “I will do everything I can to oppose it in the Senate,” and if it passes, Trump should veto it. “It is by no means a perfect bill,” Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., said on the House floor Wednesday. “There are many other changes to FISA that I would have liked to have seen here -- but this bill includes important reforms.” USA Freedom Act Section 215 surveillance authorities are to expire Sunday. Attorney General William Barr announced support for the House compromise. The House bill contains “new requirements and compliance provisions that will protect against abuse and misuse in the future while ensuring that this critical tool is available when appropriate to protect the safety of the American people,” Barr said. That Barr, who helped craft the phone records program, supports the bill “is further proof that the bill is utterly inadequate,” said American Civil Liberties Union Senior Legislative Counsel Neema Singh Guliani. The ACLU wrote lawmakers opposing the House legislation, saying the changes “are minimal -- in many cases merely representing a codification of the status quo.”