Privacy Law Blog : Privacy Lawyers & Attorneys : Proskauer Rose Law Firm : CAN-SPAM, FCRA, FACTA

The September 2008 issue of "A Moment of Privacy," a monthly e-newsletter brought to you by the Privacy and Data Security Practice Group of Proskauer Rose, LLP, has been released. 

This month's question was "I understand that Massachusetts’ new information security rule reaches beyond what other states require. What do these new rules mean for my company?'"

Past issues of A Moment of Privacy are also available.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Behavioral tracking of consumers online in order to deliver relevant advertising is a privacy issue that is receiving a lot of attention, and one that has been the focus of Federal Trade Commission and consumer group scrutiny. On September 25th, the United States Senate Commerce Committee held a hearing on online privacy and received commitments from the three industry representatives (from AT&T, Verizon and Time Warner Cable) that if they do deploy technologies that are able to track consumer online behavior in order to tailor advertising, that consumers will have clear notice and a full opportunity to provide affirmative consent. None of the companies currently use such technologies in their roles as Internet Service Providers. The broadband providers challenged the rest of the online industry, including web site operators and application providers such as Google, to provide the same protections to consumers. Essentially, the witnesses called for an end to "opt out" when it comes to online advertising.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

A Nevada law requiring encryption of customer personal information goes into effect on October 1, 2008. See Nev. Rev. Stat. § 597.970 (2007). While the legislation is short in length, it is potentially wide-ranging in scope. In particular, the legislation requires any "business in this State" to encrypt an electronic transmission (other than via facsimile) of "any personal information of a customer" to "a person outside of the secure system of the business unless the business uses encryption to ensure the security of the electronic transmission." Id.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

On September 4, 2008, in American Bankers Association v. Lockyer, No. 05-17163, 2008 WL 4070308 (9th Cir. Sept. 4, 2008), the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals revived part of the California Financial Information Privacy Act (“S.B. 1”), allowing consumers to opt-out of certain information-sharing activities between financial institutions and their affiliates. Previously, in the 2005 case American Bankers Ass'n. v. Gould, 412 F.3d 1081 (9th Cir. 2005), the Ninth Circuit ruled that the state statute was preempted by provisions of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”) regarding affiliate sharing of “consumer report” information.  The recent 2-1 decision preserves consumers’ rights under California law to restrict affiliate data-sharing related to non-consumer report information.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Section 214 of Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (“FACTA") was enacted to amend the Fair Credit Reporting Act (the “Act”) to give consumers the right to restrict certain entities from using certain information received from their affiliates to make solicitations to that consumer unless the consumer has been provided (1) “clear and conspicuous” notice that the consumer’s information will be shared for such purposes, and (2) an opportunity to opt out of having such information shared for such purposes.   

On November 7, 2007, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Federal Reserve Board, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Office of Thrift Supervision and the National Credit Union Administration issued a joint final rule (along with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Securities and Exchange Commission(SEC), which separately adopted and proposed, respectively, similar regulations) under the amended Act (the “Affiliate Marketing Rule” or “Final Rule,” codified at 12 C.F.R. Parts 41, 222, 334, 571 and 717) governing the use of specific consumer information obtained by covered entities from their affiliates for certain marketing purposes. 

The Affiliate Marketing Rule became effective on January 1, 2008, and compliance by covered entities is required by October 1, 2008.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link