Feels like the word 'sale' may actually turn into a loophole. It should have probably been worded to use 'exchange' or 'transfer' instead. But this is progress.
Massachusetts bans sale of precise location data in new privacy rights bill
11–20 of 65 posts
Re: Massachusetts bans sale of precise location data in new privacy rights bill
#12Will this have reach and teeth though? I can imagine loopholes to this... nothing stops facebook/google from buying this data from companies not in Massachusetts? and facebook/google don't have to give advertisers the location information but can still use that information when determining the advertisement to return, right? In theory the big silicon valley "targets" of this bill don't actually have a huge incentive…
> Will this have reach and teeth though? It'll have reach because MA has a long-arm statute and there's a rich history of applying that statute in the context of Chapter 93. It'll have teeth but probably not to the effect that you hope. This statute was written such that only the Attorney General can bring action; see Section 10(b). This diverges from a long history in the Commonwealth of allowing private individuals…
I don't disagree with the thrust of your criticism of the dynamic (especially long term). But there is a legitimate concern that the first test cases to hit the courts need to be quite unsympathetic egregious violators rather than surveillance dynamics that have been thoroughly normalized for decades. If people start bringing private suits against neighbors that have deployed Amazon surveillance cameras, "credit bureaus", private investigators, big tech surveillance companies directly (eg Google, and especially with weak legal arguments), it is likely to set some poor precedents and create political pushback.
Re: Massachusetts bans sale of precise location data in new privacy rights bill
#13California very quietly passed AB-1542 last week which includes precise location data, health data, SSNs, etc. I expect many states to follow suit.
Related, General Motors got hit with a $12.75M fine for reselling OnStar location data last month: https://ccpa.world/enforcement/gm-onstar-smart-driver
Re: Massachusetts bans sale of precise location data in new privacy rights bill
#14Will this have reach and teeth though? I can imagine loopholes to this... nothing stops facebook/google from buying this data from companies not in Massachusetts? and facebook/google don't have to give advertisers the location information but can still use that information when determining the advertisement to return, right? In theory the big silicon valley "targets" of this bill don't actually have a huge incentive…
once you allow someone to read data, it has been given away. even if its only retained until buffer refresh, its still given away. if its read frombuffer space and transformed into a persistent structure, its a gift that indefinately keeps giving.
but if facebook/google are the buyers, they do not violate this law... the law seems to focus on the sale & giving of this data... not the reception. This means that they just need a non-Massachusetts based data broker to sell them the data, and then they can store that data to make advertisement decisions (so long as they do not forward it along)
Re: Massachusetts bans sale of precise location data in new privacy rights bill
#15still waiting for any of the many existing privacy bills, worldwide, to start doing meaningful enforcement.
We need private right of action. That's the big thing holding up the sweeping Mass privacy law. The house supports a private right to action and the senate only wants the attorney general enforcing the law.
Re: Massachusetts bans sale of precise location data in new privacy rights bill
#16Feels like the word 'sale' may actually turn into a loophole. It should have probably been worded to use 'exchange' or 'transfer' instead. But this is progress.
Yeah, we need data minimization. As long as it's collected it is a liability for consumers, turn it into a liability for businesses to incentive them to collect as little as possible.
Re: Massachusetts bans sale of precise location data in new privacy rights bill
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Will this have reach and teeth though? It'll have reach because MA has a long-arm statute and there's a rich history of applying that statute in the context of Chapter 93. It'll have teeth but probably not to the effect that you hope. This statute was written such that only the Attorney General can bring action; see Section 10(b). This diverges from a long history in the Commonwealth of allowing private individuals…
I don't disagree with the thrust of your criticism of the dynamic (especially long term). But there is a legitimate concern that the first test cases to hit the courts need to be quite unsympathetic egregious violators rather than surveillance dynamics that have been thoroughly normalized for decades. If people start bringing private suits against neighbors that have deployed Amazon surveillance cameras, "credit bure…
Section 2 already limits applicability to persons collecting or processing data on not less than 60,000 consumers, so suits brought against neighbors would be (rightfully) dismissed.
The concern about poor precedent stemming from poor cases has some rational sense, but we have the benefit of experience. Empirically it just hasn't tended to play out like that in the case of consumer protection statutes in MA. One reason this doesn't happen in practice might be the limited bandwidth of the appellate process. The SJC could (and likely would) prioritize answering questions about the statute in the context of cases brought by the AG.
The longevity pro-consumer laws in MA provides some good empirical data that cuts against the concern about push-back.
Re: Massachusetts bans sale of precise location data in new privacy rights bill
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Will this have reach and teeth though? It'll have reach because MA has a long-arm statute and there's a rich history of applying that statute in the context of Chapter 93. It'll have teeth but probably not to the effect that you hope. This statute was written such that only the Attorney General can bring action; see Section 10(b). This diverges from a long history in the Commonwealth of allowing private individuals…
I don't disagree with the thrust of your criticism of the dynamic (especially long term). But there is a legitimate concern that the first test cases to hit the courts need to be quite unsympathetic egregious violators rather than surveillance dynamics that have been thoroughly normalized for decades. If people start bringing private suits against neighbors that have deployed Amazon surveillance cameras, "credit bure…
Couldn't this be mitigated by, say, having the private right of action not start until a few years into the applicability of the law?
Re: Massachusetts bans sale of precise location data in new privacy rights bill
#19this is the bill we need to pass in the house instead of them trying to age-(identity)gate social media.
(https://epic.org/press-release-massachusetts-senate-unanimou...)
Re: Massachusetts bans sale of precise location data in new privacy rights bill
#20Does this include vehicle data? That's a big one. Your new car selling you out constantly.
I've been driving connected cars for a decade and I haven't felt sold out yet. What am I missing?