Across the United States, evolving data collection and processing practices and advances in artificial intelligence are driving new digital services, technologies, and socially beneficial research – while also raising new opportunities, risks, and questions for individuals and communities. In response, state and federal policymakers are considering new legislative and regulatory frameworks on three interconnected fronts: comprehensive consumer privacy laws that establish baseline rights and protections for personal data across the economy; frameworks that target specific sectors and practices such as automated decisionmaking, biometric identification, companion chatbots, data-driven pricing, data brokerage, frontier AI model safety, genetic data, and health data; and youth-specific privacy and online safety laws that set distinct rules for minors. These three tracks rarely stay in their lanes: a comprehensive privacy law may include AI provisions, an AI safety bill may carve out rules for minors, a youth online safety law may hinge on biometric age verification. Understanding the landscape requires understanding both the individual pieces and how they fit together.
FPF’s U.S. Legislation team provides expert, independent, pragmatic analysis of state and federal legislative and regulatory approaches to privacy, AI, and youth online safety – three distinct but increasingly intertwined issue areas. The team tracks emerging proposals, compares new laws against existing frameworks, analyzes implementation and compliance implications, and helps policymakers and stakeholders understand how legal requirements interact with current technologies, business practices, and data uses.
Through reports, blog posts, legislative and policy analyses, webinars, in-person and virtual peer-to-peer gatherings, and educational programs, FPF helps the broader technology policy and governance community understand the mechanisms and strategies available to protect privacy, promote responsible AI development and deployment, and advance youth online safety. FPF does not typically support or oppose particular bills. Instead, the U.S. Legislation team focuses on explaining the practical and legal implications of proposals – individually and as they interact with one another. This work helps ensure that privacy, AI, and youth safety compliance and policy strategies remain future-looking, adaptable, and workable for the continued, beneficial use of data and AI.
FPF’s U.S. Legislation team is led by Tatiana Rice, Senior Director.
New Swire-FPF Report: U.S. Surveillance Law, Safe Harbor, and Reforms Since 2013
In the wake of critical decisions being handed down by the EU concerning the Safe Harbor laws (Schrems case) and U.S. Surveillance practices, Professor Peter Swire and the Future of Privacy Forum today have released a report titled “U.S. Surveillance Law, Safe Harbor, and Reforms Since 2013.”
Panelists Debated Materiality and Privacy Harms under the FTC’s Section 5
On November 5, the Future of Privacy Forum and Washington & Lee University School of Law co-hosted a panel on the Future of Section 5 of the FTC Act. The Federal Trade Commission Act permits the agency to bring civil enforcement actions under Section 5 against companies who engage in “unfair or deceptive trade practices.” […]
Student Privacy Pledge Reaches 200 Signatories!
SCHOOL VENDORS LEGALLY COMMIT TO USE STUDENT DATA ONLY FOR APPROVED EDUCATIONAL USES WASHINGTON, D.C. – Thursday, November 12, 2015 – The Future of Privacy Forum (FPF) and Software & Information Industry Association (SIIA) today announced that the Student Privacy Pledge, endorsed by President Obama, the National PTA and the National School Boards Association, […]
NHTSA & FTC Critical of House Vehicle Safety Proposal
October 14, 2015 — The House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade met to discuss proposals to improve motor vehicle safety. Much of the hearing focused on a recent proposal by committee staff to incentivize the adoption of new technologies to improve vehicle safety, which raises several privacy issues. Specifically, privacy and […]
Student Privacy Symposium
The 2015 Student Data Privacy Symposium will present a thoughtful consideration by leading education and privacy experts on how student data should be collected and used. A series of panels will review the overarching value of technology and data use by educational institutions as demonstrated by current research, as well as the related concerns and risks of such use.
Customer Privacy and the National Labor Relations Act
Last month, an Administrative Law Judge for the National Labor Relations Board ruled that Macy’s employee handbook contained overly broad confidential information policies. The decision continues efforts by the NLRB to police employer confidentiality policies, but it also demonstrates how industry efforts to protect privacy can inadvertently run afoul of Section 7 of the NLRA, […]
Communicating with Parents about Student Privacy
Recently, a number of bills have been proposed at both federal and state levels aimed at protecting student data privacy. Laws, codes of conduct, better contracts …
A Historical Primer on Section 215 Bulk Collection
Over on the IAPP’s Privacy Tracker blog, FPF Senior Fellow explains how the past week has seen two significant events concerning Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act. First, on May 7, the Second Circuit ruled that “the telephone metadata program exceeds the scope of what Congress has authorized and therefore violates” Section 215. And yesterday, the House of Representatives approved the […]
Rise of the Drones
This morning, the Center for Strategic and International Studies presented a panel conversation on some of the challenges – and opportunities – around domestic drone use. After following the issue for …
FPF Senior Fellow Peter Swire Provide Comments to the FCC on Broadband Consumer Privacy
Later today, Peter Swire, FPF Senior Fellow, will participate at the FCC’s public workshop on broadband consumer privacy. He also prepared written comments expanding on his thoughts. Professor Swire summarizes his research as follows: First, I examine the effect of the Section 222(a) definition of “proprietary information” as compared with the Section 222(c) definition of […]