State Privacy

Attorneys General in Oregon and Connecticut issued guidance over the holiday interpreting their authority under their state comprehensive privacy statutes and related authorities.  Specifically, the Oregon Attorney General’s guidance focuses on laws relevant for artificial intelligence (“AI”), and the Connecticut Attorney General’s guidance focuses on opt-out preference signals that go into effect on January 1, 2025 in the state.Continue Reading State Attorneys General Issue Guidance On Privacy & Artificial Intelligence

On September 20, 2024, California Governor Newsom signed into law SB 976, the Protecting Our Kids from Social Media Addiction Act (the “Act”). The Act defines and prohibits an “addictive internet-based service or platform” from providing an “addictive feed” to a minor unless the platform has previously obtained verifiable parental consent. The Act will take effect on January 1, 2025, and the California Attorney General will promulgate regulations on age assurance and parental consent by January 1, 2027. This post summarizes the law’s key provisions. The law includes several technical definitions and exceptions, which are explained at the end of this post.Continue Reading California Passes Law to Protect Minors from “Addictive Feeds”

On June 18, 2024, Louisiana enacted HB 577, prohibiting “social media platforms” with more than 1 million users globally from displaying targeted advertising to Louisiana users that the platform has actual knowledge are under 18 years of age and from selling the sensitive personal data of such users. The law amends the effective date of the state social media law, the Louisiana Secure Online Child Interaction and Age Limitation Act (“the SOCIAL Act”), to July 1, 2025. HB 577 also will take effect on July 1, 2025. This post summarizes the law’s key provisions.Continue Reading Louisiana Bans Targeted Advertising to Minors on Social Media Platforms

An Illinois federal court has dismissed a proposed class action alleging X Corp. violated the state’s Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”) through its use of PhotoDNA software to create “hashes” of images to scan for nudity and related content. The court held that Plaintiff failed to allege that the hashes identified photo subjects and therefore failed to allege that the hashes constituted biometric identifiers. Martell v. X Corp., 2024 WL 3011353, at *4 (N.D. Ill. June 13, 2024).Continue Reading Illinois Federal Court Dismisses BIPA Suit Against X, Holding “Biometric Identifiers” Must Identify Individuals

On June 6, the Texas Attorney General published a news release announcing that the Attorney General has opened an investigation into several car manufacturers.  The news release states that the investigation was opened “after widespread reporting that [car manufacturers] have secretly been collecting mass amounts of data about drivers directly…

Continue Reading Texas Attorney General Opens Investigation into Car Manufacturers’ Collection and Sale of Drivers’ Data

Likely spurred by plaintiffs’ recent successes in cases under Illinois’s Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”), a new wave of class actions is emerging under Illinois’s Genetic Information Privacy Act (“GIPA”). While BIPA regulates the collection, use, and disclosure of biometric data, GIPA regulates that of genetic testing information. Each has a private right of action and provides for significant statutory damages, even potentially where plaintiffs allege a violation of the rule without actual damages.[1] From its 1998 enactment until last year, there were few GIPA cases, and they were largely focused on claims related to genetic testing companies.[2] More recently, plaintiffs have brought dozens of cases against employers alleging GIPA violations based on allegations of employers requesting family medical history through pre-employment physical exams. This article explores GIPA’s background, the current landscape and key issues, and considerations for employers.Continue Reading Employers Beware: New Wave of Illinois Genetic Information Privacy Act Litigation

Last month, the Maryland legislature passed the Maryland Online Data Privacy Act (“MODPA”). Pending Governor’s signature, Maryland will become the latest state to enact comprehensive privacy legislation, joining California, Virginia, Colorado, Connecticut, Utah, Iowa, Indiana, Tennessee, Montana, Oregon, Texas, Florida, Delaware, New Jersey, New Hampshire, Kentucky, and Nebraska.

MODPA contains unique provisions that will require careful analysis to ensure compliance, including: data minimization requirements; restrictions on the collection, sale, or transfer of sensitive data; and consumer health data-related obligations.  These unique provisions have the potential to create additional work streams even for companies who have come into compliance for existing state laws.  This blog post summarizes the statute’s key takeaways.Continue Reading The Maryland Online Data Privacy Act Set to Reshape the State Privacy Legislation Landscape with Stringent Requirements

On April 17, the Nebraska governor signed the Nebraska Data Privacy Act (the “NDPA”) into law.  Nebraska is the latest state to enact comprehensive privacy legislation, joining California, Virginia, Colorado, Connecticut, Utah, Iowa, Indiana, Tennessee, Montana, Oregon, Texas, Florida, Delaware, New Jersey,  New Hampshire, Kentucky, and Maryland. The NDPA will take effect on January 1, 2025.  This blog post summarizes the statute’s key takeaways.Continue Reading Nebraska Enacts Nebraska Data Privacy Act