The American Data Privacy and Protection Act discussion draft floated by House Commerce Committee leaders and Senate Commerce Committee ranking member Roger Wicker, R-Miss., drew mixed reaction from Friday into Monday from stakeholders. The proposal directs the FTC to set national rules on what types of data tech companies can collect from users and how they can disseminate it. It would also grant a limited private right of action and preempt many state-level privacy statutes (see 2206030058). “This draft shows that there is a bipartisan path forward on long-overdue legislation to protect consumers’ privacy,” said Center for Democracy and Technology President Alexandra Reeve Givens. “While it’s not perfect, the draft is a hopeful first step.” The group recognizes “that there will be negotiations that require difficult trade-offs, but now is the time for that work to happen,” she said. The Computer & Communications Industry Association gave a tepid response that didn’t point to specific elements of the Wicker-House Commerce draft. “Internet traffic crosses state and international boundaries and internet users need basic protections to travel with them,” said CCIA President Matt Schruers. “Strong baseline privacy protections are key to consumer trust and we appreciate members of Congress working toward this goal.” The 21st Century Privacy Coalition “appreciates the discussion draft’s efforts to achieve a comprehensive national privacy effort” and looks “forward to reviewing the bill in detail and providing feedback. However, we are concerned about the bill’s failure to include certain communications services in the comprehensive framework.”
Notable CROSS rulings
The U.S. launched multilateral privacy negotiations with Canada, Japan, Korea, the Philippines, Singapore and Taiwan, Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo announced Thursday. The countries established the Global Cross-Border Privacy Rules Forum, the start of cross-border negotiations to set rules and privacy recognition for processors systems. Raimondo said the “first-of-their-kind data privacy certifications” will help companies “demonstrate compliance with internationally recognized data privacy standards.” The forum will “facilitate trade and international data flows and promote global cooperation, building on our shared data privacy values while recognizing the differences in our domestic approaches to protecting data privacy,” she said.
FCC arguments on the agency’s authority to require broadcasters to check would-be lessees against databases of registered foreign agents met apparent skepticism from at least two members of a three-judge panel at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit Tuesday.
As advocates of FCC action reallocating the 12 GHz band hope they’re nearing the finishing line, officials with the 5G for 12 GHz Coalition told us Monday the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society joined that group, adding to the push for FCC action. Members of the group said FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel appears to be waiting for the Senate to confirm Gigi Sohn as the third Democrat on the FCC, but if that doesn’t happen soon, they hope the agency will act with the current 2-2 split.
FCC commissioners held their monthly meeting Wednesday at the agency’s new headquarters for the first time, making it the first in-person meeting for commissioners since the COVID-19 pandemic caused the agency to shift to remote work. "We hope to use today's open meeting as a first step toward welcoming the agency and the public into our new building," Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel said at the meeting, which was also in part held virtually. Media and the public couldn't attend in person.
The House Commerce Committee is reviewing a bipartisan Senate proposal on children’s privacy, but Democrats see their privacy bill language as the proper base text for comprehensive legislation, said Syd Terry, chief of staff for House Consumer Protection Subcommittee Chairwoman Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill.
The FCC "has been working non-stop" to expand access to broadband with "a big assist from Congress," blogged Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel Tuesday. Commissioners will consider a notice of inquiry on digital discrimination, a rulemaking on pole replacement disputes, and a fourth round of connected care pilot program recipients during the agency's March 16 commissioners' meeting.
Senators are working with House members to “improve” legislation that would allow news publishers to negotiate revenue sharing with online platforms (see 2201140054), Senate Antitrust Subcommittee Chair Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., said during a Wednesday hearing. Ranking member Mike Lee, R-Utah, spoke against the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act (HR-1735/S-673) and efforts to mirror a similar negotiating framework Australia passed in 2021.
The FCC is statutorily required to handle the 2018 and 2022 quadrennial reviews separately, said Media Bureau staff at an FCBA virtual panel Thursday. The law says the FCC “shall” review broadcast ownership rules every four years, and that means “this is something we must do,” said MB Attorney-Adviser William Durdach, saying the law doesn’t allow the agency to “roll a quad into another quad.” Stakeholders speculated the agency could seek to skip the 2018 QR (see 2112200018).
The U.S. and EU treat Big Tech and China differently in the debate on data flows, speakers said at a virtual Progressive Policy Institute event Wednesday. From a privacy and diplomacy standpoint, Europe has painted itself into a corner, said European Centre for International Political Economy Director Hosuk Lee-Makiyama: It addressed U.S. platforms while ignoring that many people use TikTok, Zoom and similar companies, and that some personal data is going to China. While the EU and U.S. squabble, they're losing ground for future economic competitiveness, said Kristian Stout, International Center for Law & Economics innovation policy director. When the scale of NSA's Prism data collection was revealed, Europe and the U.S. demanded negotiations to scale back the practice (see 1307080059), said Lee-Makiyama: But neither party sought relief when China enacted its privacy law, so does that mean they trust President Xi Jinping? It's also inexplicable that Max Schrems has brought around 100 lawsuits, mostly against Google and Facebook, but has never sued any Chinese entity subject to that country's national security law, Lee-Makiyama said. Since the European Court of Justice struck down transfer mechanism Privacy Shield in Schrems II (see 2009100001), there's concern not only about a replacement but also about whether an alternative mechanism, standard contractual clauses (SCCs), will also be invalidated, said PPI Chief Economist Michael Mandel. The parties are essentially friendly trade partners, but the sticky question is where the EU is willing to give ground and whether the U.S. is likely to change its national security apparatus, said Stout. He said he's optimistic the EU will give some ground based on its trade commitments, because under EU law, privacy can't entirely trump national security. And if Europe has to give something, so does the U.S., he said: Overbroad surveillance data collection processes could be changed to enable the EU to grant an adequacy ruling; the lack of redress by European citizens for data misuse could come through proportional analyses in lawsuits that show that China, EU countries and other governments also engage in U.S.-like surveillance. If SCCs are invalided and there's no agreement on a revised PS, Lee-Makiyama said, he's pessimistic the EU general data protection regulation could be reversed because of its normative effect globally on cross-border data flows. The debate isn't whether there should be a GDPR, but whether it's being intertwined with trade and national security policies in a way that could lead to no trade if the discussion follows its natural conclusion, said Stout. The U.S. won't necessarily come closer to the EU position on privacy, but everyone wants a "reasonable compromise," said Lee-Makiyama.