Panel: Keep On Top of Ever-Changing Data Privacy Laws
The GDPR is serving as a template for other potential data privacy laws around the world, which in-house counsel need to pay attention to, according to the panel.
September 24, 2019 at 03:31 PM
3 minute read
In-house counsel should make compliance with laws like the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation and the California Consumer Privacy Act a top priority, a panel at the 2019 Corporate Counsel Symposium in Philadelphia said Tuesday.
Dr. Jürgen Hartung, a partner at Oppenhoff & Partner in Cologne, Germany, who joined the conference via telephone, said Japan has a new data privacy law and others are being worked out across the globe. He said while those laws are not carbon copies of the GDPR, the GDPR is serving as a template.
"They're [other countries'] goal is to be recognized by the European Commission because that means they are a safe country which allows for much easier data transfers to those countries," Hartung said.
While the GDPR was on the minds of in-house counsel and the companies they work for in 2018, this year legal departments should be working to make sure they're compliant with the CCPA, the panel said. The CCPA goes into effect Jan. 1, 2020, and impacts companies that do business in California. Businesses can be based outside of the state and still be impacted by the law, the panel said.
The CCPA covers California residents and applies to companies that do business in California. The law will apply to for-profit businesses that have an annual revenue of $25 million or more.
"It really has implications all across the United States," Michael Bonasso, a founding member of Flaherty Sensabaugh Bonasso in Charleston, West Virginia, said of the law.
Marshall Wall, managing partner at CSH Law in Raleigh, North Carolina, said the CCPA's definition of personal information is much broader than how other states have defined it in the past.
"In CCPA, much like the GDPR, personal information is defined much more broadly," Wall said. "It includes things like tags you use online. It includes biometric data and it includes [internet protocol] addresses."
Historically, data has become a commodity, and companies have gone from being able to do whatever they want with data to consumers getting more rights, Wall said. In-house counsel should continue to stay on top of the ever-changing developments in the laws, he added.
"As each of these statutes is passed in various states in the U.S. they're going to have differences," Wall said. "This is an area that is evolving literally every day, and there are going to be changes. It's an area where you have to keep on top of what's going on."
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 AllFactSet Finds New Legal Chief at Financial Data Rival S&P
11 Red State AGs Demand Damages in Antitrust Lawsuit Shaming ESG Climate Investors
3 minute readTrending Stories
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