Potential FTC Facebook Fine Could Signal Stricter Enforcement of Tech Privacy Policies
A new report says Facebook is negotiating a multibillion-dollar privacy violation fine with the Federal Trade Commission over its privacy policies. The fine would be the FTC penalty against a tech company, and could mark a shift in the agency's privacy enforcement.
February 19, 2019 at 01:00 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Corporate Counsel
Facebook is negotiating a multibillion-dollar privacy violation fine with the Federal Trade Commission, the Washington Post reported Thursday.
It would be the largest FTC penalty issued to a tech company and could mark a new era of privacy enforcement for the tech industry, privacy lawyers and professionals said. Google Inc. currently holds the tech industry record for largest FTC penalty, settling charges it violated a privacy agreement with the agency for $22.5 million in 2012.
In March 2018, the acting director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection Tom Pahl issued a statement confirming the agency was conducting a nonpublic investigation into Facebook's privacy practices and that it was “firmly and fully committed to using all of its tools to protect the privacy of consumers.”
The FTC declined to comment on the latest reports. Facebook did not immediately respond to comment.
“While the agency has agreed to larger monetary settlements for other types of legal regulatory violations, to date, the FTC's largest fine for data privacy violations has been just over $20 [million]. If the FTC is indeed seeking max recovery under the 2011 consent order with Facebook, the amount at play for alleged violations of the consumer privacy-related obligations and restrictions would be precedent setting,” said Richard Newman, an FTC investigations and defense lawyer at Hinch Newman, in an email. “Federal, state and international privacy regulators are sending a clear message that it is time for those in the tech industry to be responsible with data and ensure that proper protocols are implemented.”
Andrew Gordon, a privacy lawyer at Gordon Law Group in Illinois, said that, if Facebook is fined, it could send a signal that the FTC will increasingly use its enforcement power to protect consumer privacy rights. Which, Chris Hoofnagle, a professor of information and law at University of California, Berkeley, said could be a good thing for the U.S. tech industry.
Facebook's privacy practices have come under international scrutiny. The Menlo Park, California-based company is currently being investigated by the Irish Data Protection Commission over potential General Data Protection Regulation violations in the European Union. If Facebook is found to have violated GDPR, it could face fines up to 4 percent of its global revenue.
“From a big picture perspective, a multibillion-dollar fine [from the FTC] will be good for the U.S. industry. If the FTC does not fine Facebook severely, its deterrence narrative loses credibility, and U.S. companies will face more intervention from less flexible, foreign regulators,” Hoofnagle said in an email. “Thus, the FTC remedy is a bitter pill to swallow, but it is medicine against worse regulatory approaches technology companies will face from Europe if the FTC loses its credibility.”
Privacy lawyers said companies who don't want to face FTC fines should check their privacy policies and procedures. David Vladeck, faculty director of Georgetown Law Center's Center on Privacy and Technology, said in most cases the FTC can't impose civil penalties on first violations, noting there was no penalty imposed in the agency's first enforcement action against Facebook.
“Once a company is under an FTC order, simply comply with it,” Vladeck said in an email. “The FTC has hundreds of companies and individuals under order, and order violations are quite rare.”
|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 AllTrending Stories
- 1Judge Grants Special Counsel's Motion, Dismisses Criminal Case Against Trump Without Prejudice
- 2GEICO, Travelers to Pay NY $11.3M for Cybersecurity Breaches
- 3'Professional Misconduct': Maryland Supreme Court Disbars 86-Year-Old Attorney
- 4Capital Markets Partners Expect IPO Resurgence During Trump Administration
- 5Chief Assistant District Attorney and Litigator Shortlisted for Paulding County Judgeship
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