Lessons From GDPR Made Way Into Intel's Draft Data Privacy Legislation
David Hoffman, Intel's associate general counsel and global privacy officer, said it is clear that flexibility in different jurisdictions does not work and makes the case for strong preemption of state laws.
May 29, 2019 at 02:36 PM
3 minute read
Intel's global privacy chief said Wednesday the company took in three lessons from the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation when writing the latest draft of its Innovative and Ethical Data Use Act of 2019.
David Hoffman, Intel's associate general counsel and global privacy officer, said it is clear that flexibility in different jurisdictions does not work and makes the case for strong preemption of state laws.
“Any approach that tries to provide flexibility in different jurisdictions is a mistake in the way that data is managed now and is unworkable,” Hoffman said. “We need to have strong preemption and we do not need to states to have different requirements.”
The third draft included giving the Federal Trade Commission enforcement power over the federal law. Hoffman said the FTC is apolitical and it has done a “remarkable job” in pursuing its agenda despite its lack of resources.
If a bill similar to this were passed, the FTC would have the authority to levy fines of up to $1 billion and bad actors could face up to 10 years in prison. The harsh punishment, Hoffman said, gets entities to take data privacy seriously, as shown in the GDPR.
“When you have a legal framework that makes strong enforcement possible, people start deploying resources to protect privacy,” Hoffman said.
The bill also grants the FTC authority to “promulgate regulations as authorized by the specific provisions of this Act.”
One of the key aspects that changed from the second draft of the bill to the third is how explicit consent is described. Hoffman explained that the draft bill does not require consent in most situations. It is only required in “risky uses of data” such as health care or trying to determine someone's race.
“We want to encourage entities to get consent and figure out new technological means to get that consent,” Hoffman said.
Where the GDPR fails, Hoffman said, is the law tried to give detail on how to “accomplish privacy principles.”
“That is fraught with the risk of not scaling well to meet changes in new technology,” Hoffman said.
Despite partisan politics and a growing number of states passing their own forms of data privacy bills, Hoffman said he believes there will be a federal data privacy law in the future. He said he believes people are beginning to recognize the prospect of having 50 different laws governing privacy legislation is “unworkable.”
The draft legislation is not being proposed as is to Congress. However, Hoffman said his team has spoken to the several congressional offices about what should go into a federal data privacy bill.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllElon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
Ben & Jerry’s Accuses Corporate Parent of ‘Silencing’ Support for Palestinian Rights
3 minute read'It's Not About Speed': Forging Strong Legal Department-Law Firm Relationships Starts With Humility, Trust
6 minute readNLRB Bans 'Captive Audience' Meetings, Yanking Away Platform Employers Used to Combat Unionizing
Trending Stories
- 1How to Support Law Firm Profitability: Train Partners Up
- 2Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 3Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
- 4Baltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
- 5X Joins Legal Attack on California's New Deepfakes Law
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250