12 consumer and privacy groups asked the FCC not to roll back protections for sensitive telephone information including metadata (CPNI).
CPNI stands for Customer Proprietary Network Information and refers to the data collected by telecommunication providersabout a consumer’s telephone calls. It includes the time, date, duration and destination number of each call and the type of network a consumer subscribes to.
The FCC is considering the “burden” of the CPNI certification process, which requires the agent of a telecom to certify that CPNI protections are in place and to explain to the agency how they work.
SAN FRANCISCO (CN) — Two years ago, the California Legislature enacted the California Consumer Privacy Act, a tough and expansive piece of legislation meant to mimic Europe’s broad data protections.
The fanfare was short-lived for data-privacy advocates, as lobbyists for various business interests rushed in to water down its protections. Hostile amendments that sought to carve out exemptions to the law were largely defeated after a grueling legislative session in 2019.
When California voters receive their voter guide for the November election, they will see a 53-page measure claiming to improve their privacy rights listed as Proposition 24. What they won’t see, unless they are very diligent at reading lengthy texts, are all the loopholes and exemptions in Proposition 24.
That’s why privacy and consumer protection groups like the American Civil Liberties Union, Media Alliance, Consumer Fed, Consumer Action, Public Citizen, Color of Change, Courage Campaign, California Small Business Alliance, Electronic Frontier Foundation and many others who have fought for you for years won’t endorse Proposition 24. It isn’t what it pretends to be.
Privacy and data expert Mary Stone Ross and Tracy Rosenberg, the Executive Director of The Media Alliance join us to discuss Proposition 24, a so-called “privacy” proposal that would in reality undo key parts of the California Consumer Privacy Act.
In 2018 , an initiative headed for the ballot led to a frantic and imperfect bargaining session in Sacramento. The outcome was the only comprehensive state consumer privacy law in the country, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA).
As we pointed out then, CCPA, the result of the watering down of a stronger legislative proposal that had gotten marooned in the Legislature, had significant flaws. It was the best consumer privacy law in the country because it was basically the *only* consumer privacy law in the country.
Originally published in Communications Daily on June 3
“No changes from the last draft is good and bad, emailed Media Alliance Executive Director Tracy Rosenberg. Privacy advocates are glad the AG rejected many business requests that would have weakened CCPA but “disappointed that a few changes we recommended were not incorporated, including to accept browser do-not-track requests as opt outs.”
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra’s office is gearing up to enforce the state’s landmark internet privacy law, despite pleas from business groups that say they aren’t ready because of the coronavirus pandemic.
The California Consumer Privacy Act gives people the power to tell companies not to sell their personal data and to demand they delete the information altogether. The law took effect Jan. 1, but enforcement was delayed until July 1 to give businesses time to prepare for a mountain of data requests from their customers.