Search results

[…] just the consent context, recently lawmakers have crafted manipulative design provisions that apply to other types of interfaces and conduct. For example, the California Age Appropriate Design Code (CA AADC) prohibits services targeted at young people from using “dark patterns” to steer youth into sharing personal data or to act in a way that […]

[…] The Hill and Lawfare editorials respectively. In addition to federal privacy legislation, 2022 also saw the introduction of consumer privacy laws in Utah and Connecticut, joining California, Virginia, and Colorado. Last month, FPF urged the Federal Trade Commission to prioritize practical rules that clearly define individuals’ rights and companies’ responsibilities in our filed comments […]

[…] because the regulation of data privacy and security is a “major question” best served through Congress. These comments focused on the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling in West Virginia v. EPA, holding that regulatory agencies, absent clear congressional authorization, cannot issue rules on major questions that affect a large portion of the American economy. Several […]

[…] remarks on state-level legislation focusing on the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA), adding that Colorado, Connecticut, Utah, and Virginia have similar laws. She elaborated on the CPRA’s contractual language, comparing California’s categorization of “Businesses,” “Contractors,” “Third Parties,” and “Service Providers” to the GDPR’s distinction between […]

[…] Rights Act (CPRA) ballot initiative expanded California’s privacy regime, establishing heightened protections for certain sensitive personal information and providing a right to correct inaccurate data. In 2021, Virginia (VCDPA) and Colorado (CPA) enacted laws that are notable for creating ‘opt-in’ affirmative consent requirements in addition to California-style ‘opt-out’ privacy rights. Finally, in 2022, Connecticut […]

The Future of Privacy Forum (FPF) today released a new policy brief comparing the California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act (AADC), a first-of-its-kind privacy-by-design law in the United States, and the United Kingdom’s Age-Appropriate Design Code. While there are distinctions between the two codes, the California AADC, which is set to become enforceable on July […]

[…] Education team is pleased to publish a new policy brief that builds on this first brief by providing a comparative analysis of the United Kingdom’s Age Appropriate Design Code (UK AADC) to the California AADC, which was modeled after the UK AADC. Learn more and download the UK and CA AADC Comparative policy brief here.  New report […]

[…] the court concluded an amparo action would provide an effective and timely remedy, as opposed to the contentious administrative procedure set forth in the Administrative and Tax Code. Additionally, as a constitutional recourse, an amparo action allowed the court to study the constitutionality of the incorporation of the SRFP into Buenos Aires’ public security […]

[…] outside the U.S. to evaluate the merits of different regulatory approaches. She specifically highlighted the privacy interests of children and the United Kingdom’s recent Age Appropriate Design Code, which includes transparency and data minimization standards. Mr. Erwin also highlighted the need to protect childrens’ privacy, while cautioning that some approaches can result in “privacy […]

[…] will provide ad-hoc insight into the state of play of data protection and privacy law developments in their regions: Pablo Palazzi for Latin America, with a focus on Argentina, and Takeshige Sugimoto for Japan. Pablo Palazzi Pablo A. Palazzi, who will oversee developments in Argentina and Latin America, is currently a law professor at the […]