How Did Intel Draft Data Privacy Legislation? Starting With Lessons from the GDPR
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 30, 2019 at 02:00 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Corporate Counsel
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 AllJAMS Launches Initiative to Leverage AI Technology in Dispute Resolution
To Woo Law Firms, Legal Training Platforms Are Combining Hands-On and Online Learning
The American Arbitration Association Unveils Gen AI-Powered Panelist Search Tool
UnitedLex Appoints GC Renee Meisel as New CEO, Replacing James Schellhase After Short Tenure
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Dechert partners Andrew J. Levander, Angela M. Liu and Neil A. Steiner have stepped in to defend Arbor Realty Trust and certain executives in a pending securities class action. The complaint, filed July 31 in New York Eastern District Court by Levi & Korsinsky, contends that the defendants concealed a 'toxic' mobile home portfolio, vastly overstated collateral in regards to the company's loans and failed to disclose an investigation of the company by the FBI. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Pamela K. Chen, is 1:24-cv-05347, Martin v. Arbor Realty Trust, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Arthur G. Jakoby, Ryan Feeney and Maxim M.L. Nowak from Herrick Feinstein have stepped in to defend Charles Dilluvio and Seacor Capital in a pending securities lawsuit. The complaint, filed Sept. 30 in New York Southern District Court by the Securities and Exchange Commission, accuses the defendants of using consulting agreements, attorney opinion letters and other mechanisms to skirt regulations limiting stock sales by affiliate companies and allowing the defendants to unlawfully profit from sales of Enzolytics stock. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Andrew L. Carter Jr., is 1:24-cv-07362, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Zhabilov et al.
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
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