Hands Off My Data: What Businesses Need to Know About the CCPA
Beginning in January 2023, the scope of the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) becomes broader and may become applicable to your business; noncompliance could result in both regulatory and monetary penalties.
November 03, 2022 at 12:59 PM
7 minute read
Going into the fourth quarter of 2022, businesses should be aware of changes in the law that could affect them in 2023. One quickly changing area of regulation is data privacy. You may assume that if your business is not physically located in a particular state, like California, it is not subject to that state's laws. However, beginning in January 2023, the scope of the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) becomes broader and may become applicable to your business; noncompliance could result in both regulatory and monetary penalties.
California enacted the CCPA in 2018 to protect the privacy rights of California residents by expressly requiring businesses collecting consumer data over the internet to inform consumers and allow them to opt out of third-party data sales, have collected data disclosed to them, and have collected data deleted upon request. The CCPA applies to any for-profit entity doing business in California that collects, sells, or shares a California residents' personal data and:
- Has annual gross revenues in excess of $25 million; or
- Possesses information of 50,000 or more California consumers, households, or devices this number will be increased to 100,00 starting January 1, 2023); or
- Earns more than 50% of its annual revenue from selling California consumers' personal information.
Thus, if your business offers goods or services to Californians, or—importantly for 2023, obtains goods or services from Californians—and meets any of the three criteria above, you need to look closely at your data collection process to ensure compliance with the CCPA.
This content has been archived.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 AllWhile Data Breaches May Lead to Years of Legal Battles, Cyberattacks Can Be Prevented
4 minute readSurvival Guide for Executives and Board Members: 4 Steps to Safeguard Against Individual Liability for Data Security Failures
9 minute readProposed 'Bulk Sensitive Personal Data' Rule and the DOJ’s Comprehensive National Security Regulations
7 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Bar Report - Jan. 27
- 2Cornell Claims AT&T, Verizon Violated the University's Wi-Fi Patents
- 3OCR Issues 'Dear Colleagues' Letter Regarding AI in Medicine
- 4Corporate Litigator Joins BakerHostetler From Fish & Richardson
- 5E-Discovery Provider Casepoint Merges With Government Software Company OPEXUS
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