Search results

On April 1, 2024, the Future of Privacy Forum filed comments to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in response to the agency’s Request for Information on how privacy impact assessments (PIAs) may mitigate privacy risks exacerbated by AI and other advances in technology. The OMB issued the RFI pursuant to the White […]

[…] data protection authorities globally. FPF Activities during IAPP GPS Engage Stakeholders, Launch India Focus, and Highlight Staff Experts As in years past, FPF took part in the 2024 IAPP Global Privacy Summit in Washington, D.C., which brings together thousands of privacy pros and, most notably, some of FPF’s closest stakeholders to host a week […]

[…] guide their implementation and serve as a model for other emerging safety technologies. Washington set the stage for FPF’s report and the panel discussion, noting the January 2024 Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) on Advanced Impaired Driving Prevention Technologies from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The ANPRM comes out of the […]

[…] the technologies at the forefront of data protection law. FPF will honor and celebrate Wolf’s contributions to the privacy sector and FPF during his tenure at their 2024 Advisory Board Meeting’s Opening Night Reception on June 5. “In my experience in leading privacy and cybersecurity law and research, I’ve come to recognize the qualities […]

[…] the Age of Data Protection: Background for a Proposed Risk-Utility Framework for Novel Advertising Solutions (v 1.0), which will be open for Public Comment until May 26, 2024. Download the Proposed Risk-Utility Framework HERE FPF welcomes public comments until May 26, 2024 The digital advertising industry is in the midst of a sea change. […]

[…] neurodata. Perhaps the most consequential call for action was the 2022 Neurorights Model Law, drafted by the Latin American and Caribbean Parliament (Parlatino), a regional organization that promotes regional integration through legislative harmonization. The model law provides both structure and foundational concepts to regulate neurotechnology, including establishing an independent oversight authority and providing redress […]

[…] as a victim of crime, included in Oregon, or financial information, included in California and New Jersey). The definition of biometric data is broader than that in Virginia (covering data generated from a photograph or an audio or video recording if generated to identify a specific individual), but narrower than that in New Jersey […]

“At this critical moment in time, the U.S. is positioned to demonstrate leadership to develop and regulate emerging technologies such as AI. These tools, while incredibly advantageous when deployed responsibly, also carry tremendous potential to cause harm. We commend the Biden administration for recognizing the multifaceted challenges and opportunities presented by AI technologies.  We’re also […]

[…] noted that this was an evolving trend and suggested that it would likely extend to India as well.  Panelists noted that some data protection authorities were proactively promoting alternative legal bases to consent. This need arose because organizations in their jurisdictions were over-relying on consent as the de facto default legal basis for processing […]

[…] in this area, state legislators have been the most active in mandating protections for this particularly sensitive category of personal information. In 2023, Montana, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia joined six other states (Arizona, California, Kentucky, Maryland, Utah, and Wyoming) that have enacted privacy laws for direct-to-consumer genetic testing companies. These four newly enacted laws […]