Data Privacy Laws

Subscribe to Data Privacy Laws via RSS

Earlier this month, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) instituted public administrative and cease and desist proceedings against eBX, LLC (“eBX”), a broker-dealer registered with the SEC.  eBX operates LeveL ATS, an alternative trading system (“ATS”) known as a “black pool,” which is a proprietary market where traders may exchange…

On June 29, 2012, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie signed into law legislation amending New Jersey’s unclaimed property law relating to the escheat of abandoned stored value cards (SVCs) to the state. Under the original unclaimed property law, which took effect July 1, 2010, SVCs that were inactive for two years were presumed abandoned, and New Jersey required that the monetary value associated with the inactive cards be escheated to the state. Additionally, SVC issuers were required to (a) “obtain” the name and address of each card owner or purchaser, and (b) “at a minimum, maintain a record of the zip code of the owner or purchaser” of each SVC. Under the amended law, SVCs are presumed abandoned after five years of inactivity (as opposed to two years), and SVC issuers have a forty-eight month grace period before they are required to collect the names, addresses, and zip codes of SVC owners or purchasers. Issuers that do not collect purchasers’ names and addresses in the normal course of business or during a card-registration process are exempted from collecting purchasers’ names and addresses under the law, but they are still required to collect and maintain purchasers’ zip codes.
It should be noted that the unclaimed property law potentially conflicts with a separate New Jersey law protecting the personal information of credit card holders (N.J. Stat. § 56:11-17 (2012)). That law makes it unlawful for any person to require the disclosure of any personal identification information from a credit card holder that is not required to complete the transaction as a condition of allowing the card holder to use the credit card to complete the transaction. While we await the resolution of this potential conflict, courts may rule that no conflict exists: § 56:11-17 only addresses credit card use, but the state’s unclaimed property law makes no distinction between payment methods (and, therefore, doesn’t condition the use of a credit card on the collection of personal information).
…

On June 7, 2012, the Article 29 Working Party, an independent advisory body composed of representatives from the national data protection authorities of the EU Member States, the European Data Protection Supervisor and the European Commission, issued Opinion 04/2012 regarding which types of cookies are exempted from the informed user-consent requirement under Directive 2002/58 of the European Parliament (the E-Privacy Directive).

 

Article 5.3 of the E-Privacy Directive requires that websites must obtain informed consent from users prior to storing cookies on users’ equipment.  The E-Privacy Directive provides for two exemptions to this rule: (a) when the cookie is used for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network; and (b) when the cookie is strictly necessary in order for the provider of an information society service explicitly requested by the user to provide the service.

On May 28th, the Commission nationale de l’informatique et des libertés (“CNIL”), the French  authority responsible for data privacy, published guidance on breach notification law affecting electronic communications service providers.   The guidance was issued with reference to European Directive 2002/58/EC, the e-Privacy Directive, which imposes specific breach notification requirements on electronic communication service providers.

French legislator recently amended Article 34 of the Data Protection Act to reflect the EU e-Privacy Directive’s breach notification requirement.According to Article 34 of the French data protection law (as revised), the notification obligations are applicable if:

  • Personal data is processed;
  • By an electronic communications service provider;
  • During the course of its business of providing electronic communications services (e.g. telephone service or internet access)

On May 8th, Vermont became the most recent state to amend its security breach notification law. Among the many changes, companies that are affected by a data breach are now required to notify the Attorney General of Vermont within 45 days after the discovery or notification of the breach.
…

 The Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office ("AGO") has entered into an Assurance of Discontinuance (the "Settlement") with a Massachusetts company after allegations that the company failed to adequately protect personal information of Massachusetts residents. The AGO alleged that an employee of Maloney Properties, Inc. ("MPI") stored unencrypted personal information on a company laptop, and failed to follow the company’s written information security program ("WISP") that set forth the company’s standards for protecting personal information. MPI agreed to pay a fine of $15,000 in connection with the Settlement.

The smart grid is an advanced metering infrastructure made up of “smart meters” capable of recording detailed and near-real time data on consumer electricity usage.  That data would then be sent to utilities through a wireless communications network.  In recent years, utilities have increased the pace of smart meter deployment—smart meters are expected to be on 65 million homes by 2015.  A smart grid could deliver electricity more efficiently and would enable consumers to track and adjust their energy usage in real time through a home display.  But these new capabilities also implicate new privacy concerns.