U.S. Legislation

Today, the Future of Privacy Forum submitted comments to the Washington State Senate Ways & Means Committee on the proposed Washington Privacy Act, Senate Bill 5376. FPF takes a “neutral” position regarding the Bill, and makes a few important points. FPF commends the Bill’s sponsors for addressing a broad set of individual data protection rights. […]

FPF has long supported federal comprehensive consumer privacy law. We believe that both businesses and consumers will gain from one clear standard that provides consumers with needed protections and provides industry with certainty and guidance.

FPF’s CEO, Jules Polonetsky, recently published an opinion piece in The Hill that discussed the need for comprehensive federal privacy legislation.

The Future of Privacy Forum tracks student privacy news very closely, and shares relevant news stories with our newsletter subscribers.* Approximately every month, we post “The Top 10,” a blog with our top student privacy stories.

Last week, the Future of Privacy Forum filed written comments in response to the California Public Utilities Commission’s proposed decision authorizing pilot programs for passenger service in Autonomous Vehicles. The CPUC is a consumer protection agency that oversees, among other topics, provision of passenger service in the state. The proposed decision called for a number of criteria to be met by companies seeking to operate AV passenger service, including reporting of communications between passengers and remote operators of driverless AVs, as well as aggregated operations data.

Yesterday, the Future of Privacy Forum submitted written comments to members of the Minnesota House of Representatives in response to the pending student privacy bill, the Student Data Privacy Act (HF 1507). FPF expressed concerns about the proposed language of the bill, which would create conflicting requirements for schools and education technology companies, and likely cause unintended consequences for Minnesota schools and students.

Analysis of personal data can be used to improve services, advance research, and combat discrimination. However, such analysis can also create valid concerns about differential treatment of individuals or harmful impacts on vulnerable communities. These concerns can be amplified when automated decision-making uses sensitive data (such as race, gender, or familial status), impacts protected classes, or affects individuals’ eligibility for housing, employment, or other core services. When seeking to identify harms, it is important to appreciate the context of interactions between individuals, companies, and governments—including the benefits provided by automated decision-making frameworks, and the fallibility of human decision-making.

The Future of Privacy Forum tracks student privacy news very closely, and shares relevant news stories with our newsletter subscribers. Approximately every month, we post “The Top 10,” a blog with our top student privacy stories. 

This week, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) updated its guidance on COPPA, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, to clarify that the 1998 statute applies not just to websites and online service providers that collect data from children, but also to Internet of Things devices, including children’s toys.

The Future of Privacy Forum tracks student privacy news very closely, and shares relevant news stories with our newsletter subscribers. Approximately every month, we post “The Top 10,” a blog with our top student privacy stories.