Apple's U.S. Privacy Portal May Have Limited Impact on Others' GDPR Approach
Apple has a new privacy portal for users to access their data, but the company's business model means other tech companies may not be following its lead.
October 24, 2018 at 09:00 AM
3 minute read
Apple is handing over the keys to your digital filing cabinets. As of last week, Americans in all 50 states can access an electronic inventory of the data they've accumulated over years of music purchases, contact updates and photos sent to the cloud. They can also start the process of deleting that same information.
But don't necessarily expect the start of a new trend though. Since Apple's business interests are vested primarily in hardware, it can more easily comply with emerging privacy laws that mandate such features as compared to more data and advertising-driven companies like Google or Facebook.
A privacy portal feature was rolled out to Apple users in the European Union in May 2018 in compliance with the EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which among other things requires service providers to generate “a copy of the personal data, free of charge, in an electronic format” upon a subject's request. It also says that users can “have the data controller erase his/her personal data.”
Voluntarily bringing the same portal stateside could prove to be something of a win-win for a company built on the backs of iPods and MacBook Pros. It gets to polish an already shiny reputation among users as a major proponent of privacy and data protection without risking significant damage to the bottom line.
Apple “has sometimes been called a 'walled garden' in the sense that it is zealously protecting the data on its platform. And it's not sharing with third parties, as where data-driven businesses thrive off of sharing data with third parties and collecting as much data from consumers as they can,” said Jarno Vanto, a shareholder and member of the intellectual property group at Polsinelli.
The company can afford to take a hard line on privacy. In the second quarter of 2018, the majority of Apple's income, approximately 62 percent, was generated by the iPhone. By contrast, the money brought in from Google's advertising business accounted for close to 86 percent of parent company Alphabet Inc.'s revenue.
Companies that rely on data collected from consumers to drive business may not be as willing as to relinquish control over how and when that information can be collected or used.
“The data-driven businesses are arguing for a different sort of regime from the EU GDPR, but Apple, again, is signaling that they want European-style regulation,” Vanto said.
So the question becomes if Apple carries enough stature within the tech sphere to engender imitators through example alone. Hanley Chew, a lawyer focused on privacy and data security litigation with Fenwick & West, thinks that it might.
“Apple is one of the dominant players in the market… I could see that there would definitely be pressure to comply with any standards that Apple's adopted,” Chew said.
He foresees companies adopting similar mechanisms to make consumer data more readily available, not just to comply with the GDPR, but emerging domestic statutes and legislation like the California Consumer Privacy Act. Businesses that choose to wait to implement any changes could eventually find themselves playing catch up.
“It's the other companies that haven't complied that are going to have to likely develop policies procedures and infrastructure as such that they're able to have this data readily available to make it accessible to consumers,” Chew said.
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 AllCalifornia Becomes 2nd State to Give Brain Waves Data Privacy Protections, With Mixed Reaction
Former FBI Cyber Expert on How AI Will Exacerbate Law Firms' Wire Transfer Vulnerabilities
Trending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 3Guarantees Are Back, Whether Law Firms Want to Talk About Them or Not
- 4How I Made Practice Group Chair: 'If You Love What You Do and Put the Time and Effort Into It, You Will Excel,' Says Lisa Saul of Forde & O'Meara
- 5Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
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