DeSaulnier Bill to Strengthen Personal Information Privacy Passes Committee

June 25, 2014 16:00 pm · 15 comments

A bill by Senator Mark DeSaulnier (D-Concord) to protect the personal information of consumers passed the Assembly Judiciary Committee today.

The bill, “SB 1348″ reinforces a consumer’s constitutional right to privacy by requiring that data brokers give California residents the option to opt-out of having their personal information sold or traded. This bill defines a data broker as a commercial entity that collects, assembles, and sells personal information of people who have had no prior direct contact with the data broker. This definition was derived from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in recent reports on the data broker industry.

“Consumers should have a right to protect their personal information from being bought, sold, and traded by unregulated data brokers,” Senator DeSaulnier said. “Californians face serious personal safety threats, privacy violations, and discrimination when they have no control over who can buy and sell their personal information. Californians should have a clear and simple way to opt-out of having their personal information bought and sold.”

Research from the Pew Center indicates that 68% of US internet users feel that current laws are not sufficient to protect people’s privacy online, and that 86% of users have taken steps to mask their digital footprint. This bill would take steps towards establishing a citizen’s fundamental right to privacy in the modern digital world. Recently, the FTC released a report, Data Brokers: A Call for Transparency and Accountability, outlining the lack of consumer rights in relation to personal information that is held by data brokers. SB 1348 works towards the FTC’s call for greater protections of consumers’ personal information.

This bill requires a data broker who sells personal information to third parties to allow California residents to opt-out of the sale and public posting of their personal information upon request. SB 1348 requires that data brokers offer an option to opt-out, either in written form or in an easily located link on their business websites. Additionally, the bill prohibits the data broker from re-posting the individual’s personal information or transferring the information to another business entity.

1 Anon June 25, 2014 at 4:16 PM

About time Desaulnier did something worthwhile

2 concordkiwi June 25, 2014 at 4:25 PM

Why should we have to opt-out, Better if we choose to opt-in.

3 anon June 25, 2014 at 4:35 PM

Should have been written as opt-in option, as in no action is an automatic opt-out.

4 Helpful When he Wants Something From Us June 25, 2014 at 4:35 PM

“..option to opt-out of having their personal information sold or traded.”

What would make far more sense is consumers would have to opt-in.

5 Iron Maiden June 25, 2014 at 5:13 PM

Privacy is the key word, I’m glad about this legislation.

6 EdiBirsan June 25, 2014 at 5:28 PM

And how are we suppose to find out who these brokers are that we have to inform that we don’t want them in the first place?

7 SKS June 25, 2014 at 5:52 PM

And how many jobs will this create? NONE.

A great way to prioritize Mark. PENCIL HEAD.

8 ChampagneKitty June 25, 2014 at 6:34 PM

Maybe this legislation wouldn’t have gone anywhere if it included opt-in instead of opt-out…just a thought…

9 Yhe Phantom June 25, 2014 at 7:05 PM

SKS

You don’t like improvements…right?

10 KAD June 25, 2014 at 8:13 PM

I think Comcast is a broker because of the phone call that went to my parents house after I had looked at a web site.

11 Do-not-call June 25, 2014 at 9:50 PM

You mean like the do-not-call list? Yeah that worked good. Moron, go solve the the real problems.

12 VikingPrincess June 25, 2014 at 11:00 PM

Have not read this specifically. But next steps are to set up a way to monitor this occurs, a resource for consumers etc.. If consumers information is provided again are they fined? What happens? Will this be realistically enforced and businesses held accountable, in addition to those enforcing this law?
Just hope this is tangible when all is done, as opposed to the illusion of the do not call list ;)

13 Marissa June 25, 2014 at 11:34 PM

What a Moron!

14 Elwood June 25, 2014 at 11:45 PM

I can’t wait for him to go to D.C. and disappear into obscurity as one of the most junior members of the minority party in the House.

15 The Realist June 26, 2014 at 11:40 AM

So they are trying to finish killing off Silicon Valley? Idiots.
No wonder companies are leaving Clowifornia by the drooves.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: