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 […]

[…] Credit: Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC), Silas See These remarks were followed by a panel discussion that focused on key themes from the report and considered how to promote consistency and interoperability in legal bases for processing personal data around the APAC region while also ensuring the right balance between the interests of individuals, the […]

[…] 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 […]

[…] from consent-centric privacy practices. Consent practices are often restricted to individual jurisdictions and their legal systems. FPF and ABLI’s new report aims to elevate this discussion by promoting alternatives to consent measures, thereby increasing the accountability of organizations that process personal data. By using various alternative legal bases other than consent and with an […]

[…] (Art 5)  This right expresses the ‘principle of transparency’ found under Article 16(2)(a); The right to access and obtain a copy of the data subject’s personal data free of charge, except for certain conditions that require a fee. (Art 7);  A right to rectification in which the data subject may complete, update, or correct […]

[…] 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 […]