Tech Representatives, Senators Discuss Framework for US Federal Data Privacy Law
Tech industry representatives joined senators Wednesday to discuss policy points for a federal data protection law. Both sides have pushed for a federal law as data breaches become an increasing consumer concern and California's data privacy law implementation date approaches.
February 28, 2019 at 01:00 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Corporate Counsel
The framework for a U.S. federal data privacy law took clearer shape at a Senate committee on commerce, science and transportation hearing Wednesday.
Lobbyists representing Google, Facebook and other tech companies discussed state law pre-emption, violation penalties, notification requirements and special protections for children with members of the committee. Data breaches at Uber, Facebook and Equifax and the implementation of the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation are turning American regulators on both sides of the aisle toward a federal privacy law.
Tech companies have also pushed for a federal law. That's in part an effort to pre-empt the state-level California Consumer Privacy Act before its 2020 implementation date; some have criticized the act, claiming its definition of personal data is too broad.
“Are we here just because we don't like the California law and we just want a federal preemption law to shut it down? Or do people think you can have meaningful federal privacy legislation without that [pre-emption]?” asked Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Washington. She said the committee “cannot pass a weaker federal law just at the expense of states.”
Jon Leibowitz, the co-chairman of the 21st Century Privacy Coalition, which represents telecom companies, and Michael Beckerman, the president and chief executive officer of the Internet Association, which represents tech giants Google, Facebook, Amazon, Inc. and others, both responded that their groups wanted pre-emption of the CCPA in federal law.
Victoria Espinel, the president and CEO of The Software Alliance, said companies she represents, including Apple Inc. and Microsoft Corp., want a federal law that goes further than the CCPA, requiring consumers opt-in to sharing personal, sensitive data. Apple CEO Tim Cook has publicly called for an American version of GDPR, as has Cisco Systems Inc. chief legal officer Mark Chandler.
“Enacting federal privacy legislation is necessary in light of the patchwork of privacy bills being produced in legislatures around the country,” Leibowitz said. He said CCPA and other state privacy laws are being drafted “in haste” with “multiple drafting flaws.”
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, R-West Virginia, noted that even with U.S. federal pre-emption of the CCPA, companies operating in Europe would need to comply with GDPR, which has faced similar criticisms.
Committee members also discussed fines for companies violating the future bill, proposing an increase in the Federal Trade Commission's ability to penalize first-time offenders. The FTC currently cannot fine for first-time violations, but that could change under a federal data privacy law. Espinel said the companies she represents are strong proponents of this proposal.
Sen. Ed Markey, D-Massachusetts, also raised concerns about privacy rights for children under a federal law. Markey, who drafted the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act that protects those under 13, proposed data collectors require opt-in consent for users under 16 years old. He noted the CCPA and GDPR both require special protections for minors.
“Without protections for children, it makes no sense to pre-empt California law,” he said.
Other proposals included simplifying privacy notifications that inform users of their data privacy rights in a clear, concise way free of legalese and moving to a legitimate interest model of data collection rather than relying on user consent.
GDPR uses a legitimate interest model, requiring companies to establish a reasonable cause for collecting and storing user data. Tech representatives also pushed for a “tech neutral” bill, which would place the same restrictions on all data collectors, regardless of industry.
Sen. John Thune, R-South Dakota, predicted a federal law will come in the “next couple years.” A similar hearing was held by the U.S. House of Representatives' consumer protection and commerce subcommittee Tuesday.
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
© 2025 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
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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