Sweeping Privacy Legislation Would Include Private Right of Action

Posted on July 20, 2010 by Hunton & Williams LLP

On July 19, 2010, Representative Bobby Rush (D-Ill.) introduced a bill "to foster transparency about the commercial use of personal information" and "provide consumers with meaningful choice about the collection, use and disclosure of such information."  The bill, cleverly nicknamed the "BEST PRACTICES Act", presumably intends to set the standards for the use of consumer personal information by marketers.  A similar bill was introduced by Representatives Boucher and Stearns in early May.  Although both proposals would require opt-out consent for online behavioral advertising and express, affirmative consent for the collection or sharing of sensitive information, Rush's bill has a broader definition of "sensitive information" and includes several other key differences.  Perhaps most notably, unlike the earlier draft legislation, Rush's bill features a private right of action that would allow individuals to sue companies that violate the law for up to $1,000 in actual damages, plus punitive damages and costs and attorney's fees.  The bill contains a safe harbor from the private right of action for companies that participate in, and comply with, a self-regulatory "Choice Program" approved by the FTC.  In addition, the bill excludes from its definition of "covered information" any information collected from or about an employee by an employer "that directly relates to the employee-employer relationship."  A hearing on the proposed bill will be held on Thursday July 22, 2010.

Read the text of the bill. 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

FTC Further Extends Enforcement Deadline for Red Flags Rule

Posted on May 28, 2010 by Hunton & Williams LLP

On May 28, 2010, the FTC announced that it would again delay enforcement of the Identity Theft Red Flags Rule.  This is the fifth time the Commission has announced an extension of the enforcement deadline, after most recently extending the deadline to June 1, 2010.  The Red Flags Rule requires “creditors” and “financial institutions” that have “covered accounts” to develop and implement written identity theft prevention programs to help identify, detect and respond to patterns, practices or specific activities – known as “red flags” – that could indicate identity theft.  The enforcement date is now December 31, 2010, for creditors and financial institutions subject to FTC jurisdiction.  The FTC stated that the delay had been requested by members of Congress who are currently considering a bill that would limit the rule’s scope.  If Congress passes legislation limiting the scope of the Red Flags Rule with an effective date earlier than December 31, 2010, the FTC will begin enforcement as of that effective date.

Please refer to our previous post regarding other developments that may limit the Red Flags Rule’s application.

Tags: , , , , , ,

Congressmen Introduce Draft Privacy Legislation

Posted on May 4, 2010 by Hunton & Williams LLP

On May 4, 2010, Congressmen Rick Boucher (D-VA) and Cliff Stearns (R-FL) introduced draft legislation designed to protect the privacy of personal information both on the Internet and in offline contexts.  View drafts of the text of the bill and an executive summary of the proposed bill.

The legislation would apply to any “covered entity,” which is defined as “a person engaged in interstate commerce that collects data containing covered information.”  The term “covered information” is very broad and includes, but is not limited to, an individual’s first name or initial and last name, a postal address, a telephone number or an email address.  Government agencies and entities that collect covered information from fewer than 5,000 individuals in any 12-month period (and do not collect sensitive information) would not be considered “covered entities” for purposes of the law. 

Among other things, covered entities would be required to:

  • provide an individual with a privacy notice and an opportunity to opt-out before they may collect, use or disclose covered information from or about that individual;
  • obtain the opt-in consent of individuals before collecting sensitive information such as medical or financial records;
  • obtain the opt-in consent of individuals before sharing covered information with unaffiliated parties; and
  • establish, implement and maintain appropriate administrative, technical and physical safeguards to protect covered information.

The draft legislation gives enforcement authority to the Federal Trade Commission, which may issue regulations to implement the measure, and allows state attorneys general and state consumer protection agencies to bring civil actions on behalf of their states’ residents against anyone who violates the law.

The bill will be formally introduced following a one-month comment period.
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

FTC Extends Enforcement Deadline for Red Flags Rule (Again)

Posted on October 30, 2009 by Hunton & Williams LLP

The FTC today announced that it would, for the fourth time, delay enforcement of the Identity Theft Red Flags Rule.  The enforcement date is now June 1, 2010 for creditors and financial institutions subject to FTC jurisdiction.  The agency stated that the delay was requested by members of Congress, who are currently considering a bill that would limit the rule's scope.  That bill (which would exclude certain entities with 20 or fewer employees from the rule's definition of "creditor" and also would provide a mechanism for other entities to apply for that exclusion) recently passed the House by a margin of 400 to 0 and was referred to the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs.  Please refer to our recent post regarding other developments that limit the rule's application.

Tags: , , , , , ,

Court Finds That Lawyers Are Not Subject to the FTC's Identity Theft Red Flags Rule

Posted on October 29, 2009 by Hunton & Williams LLP

It is being reported that the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia agreed this morning with the American Bar Association's argument that the FTC's Identity Theft Red Flags Rule ("Red Flags Rule" or the "Rule") does not apply to lawyers.  The Rule implements Section 114 and 315 of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (the "FACT Act").  In relevant part, the Rule requires creditors and financial institutions that offer or maintain certain accounts to implement an identity theft prevention program.  The program must be designed to detect, prevent, and mitigate the risk of identity theft. The FTC has interpreted the definition of "creditor" broadly.  The Commission has taken the position in publications and numerous panels that lawyers and law firms meet the definition of creditor because they allow clients to pay for legal services after the services are rendered.  For law firms (as well as for other entities that the FTC deems subject to its enforcement jurisdiction), November 1, 2009 is the deadline for compliance with the provisions of the Rule that require implementation of an identity theft prevention program.

In reaching the decision, Judge Reggie Walton is reported to have stated that he was reluctant to conclude that Congress intended to regulate lawyers when it enacted the FACT Act, which the Red Flags Rule implements.  The court also questioned the FTC's broad interpretation of the term "creditor." Judge Walton is reported to have questioned whether the term could be interpreted so broadly as to render a plumber who bills a customer after performing his work a "creditor" within the meaning of the Rule.  Notably, the Judge's comment may leave the door open for other challenges to the Rule by myriad small businesses whom the FTC considers "creditors" subject to the Rule.

It is reported that the court granted an injunction against the enforcement of the Rule and a declaratory judgment finding that lawyers are not subject to the Rule.  The FTC is expected to appeal the decision.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Obama Proposes New Agency to Regulate Consumer Financial Privacy

Posted on July 2, 2009 by Hunton & Williams LLP

On June 30, 2009, the Obama Administration sent legislation to Congress that would create a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency ("CFPA").  Working with state regulators, the new agency would assume authority for the privacy provisions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, and would have the power to write rules and impose penalties pursuant to a variety of existing statutes, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act and the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act.  To date, these powers have been shared among all financial services regulators, including the Federal Trade Commission ("FTC").  Under the proposal, the FTC would retain primary responsibility for preventing fraud and encouraging security in the financial markets. 

While some regulatory authority for financial products and services protections would flow from the FTC to the CFPA, the FTC would have increased powers to issue rules related to unfair and deceptive practices, and an enhanced ability to issue civil monetary penalties.  The proposal also includes expanded FTC authority over the banking sector with respect to data security.  While the legislation proposes transferring staff from certain financial services regulators, there would be no transfer of staff from the FTC.  Accordingly, the FTC may have more resources to pursue other consumer protection issues, including privacy in non-financial markets.

The Administration's full report on its financial reform plan can be viewed here.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,