{"id":1271,"date":"2020-02-24T10:42:23","date_gmt":"2020-02-24T10:42:23","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/achangeiscoming.net\/?p=1271"},"modified":"2020-02-24T10:42:23","modified_gmt":"2020-02-24T10:42:23","slug":"bad-day-bad-privacy-bill-good-day-privacy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/2024.thenexus.today\/index.php\/2020\/02\/24\/bad-day-bad-privacy-bill-good-day-privacy\/","title":{"rendered":"DRAFT: A bad day for a bad privacy bill, a good day for privacy"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #ff00ff;\"><strong>DRAFT!\u00a0 FEEDBACK WELCOME!<\/strong><\/span><br \/>\n<strong><span style=\"color: #ff00ff;\">Please do not forward yet!<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-large wp-image-1273\" src=\"http:\/\/achangeiscoming.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/7\/2020\/02\/capitol-1024x874.jpg\" alt=\"The Washington State Capitol in Olympia\" width=\"1024\" height=\"874\" \/><\/p>\n<blockquote><p>State lawmakers in Washington want the state to be the gold standard for regulating companies and governments that collect people\u2019s digital data or use facial recognition programs.<\/p>\n<p>\u2014 Joseph O\u2019Sullivan, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.govtech.com\/policy\/Washington-Passes-Data-Privacy-Bill-as-Questions-Remain.html\">Washington [Senate] Passes Data Privacy Bill as Questions Remain<\/a>, Feb 19 2020.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>We are testifying today as other because while we support the passing of privacy legislation in Washington, we are unable to effectively enforce this bill as currently written.<\/p>\n<p>&#8211; Andrea Alegrett of the Attorney General\u2019s Office (AGO) Consumer Protection Division, at the House ITED Committee hearing on SB 6281, the Washington Privacy Act, Feb 21 2020<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Privacy advocates killed a similarly-weak &#8220;privacy&#8221; bill in last year&#8217;s session, so tech companies like Microsoft and Amazon have spent a lot of time, energy, and money lobbying for SB 6281 &#8212; and proposing it to other states as a model.\u00a0 After the Washington State Senate passed SB 6281 46-1 last week, with only Bob Hasegawa voting no, it seemed like their investment might be paying off.<\/p>\n<p>But Friday&#8217;s hearing at the House Innovation, Technology &amp; Economic Development (ITED) Committee may well change the momentum, and put us on a path to legislation that would truly protect Washingtonians privacy.<\/p>\n<p>The AGO&#8217;s statement on un-enforceability was the biggest bombshell.\u00a0 Their analysis is straightforward:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>SB 6821 does not include a \u201cper se\u201d clause, saying that any violation of the WPA is also a violation of the Consumer Protection Act.\u00a0 As a result, &#8220;the AGO\u2019s enforcement and investigative authority is severely limited.&#8221;<\/li>\n<li>The AGO is also concerned that the \u201cbroad exceptions that would permit industry to sidestep the very consumer rights and obligations created by this bill\u201d limit their enforcement ability<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>There are a lot of other problems with the bill as well, including a very bad section on facial recognition and the absence of a &#8220;private right of action&#8221;.\u00a0 SB 6281 says that only the AG is allowed to enforce the law; people who are harmed\u00a0can&#8217;t launch lawsuits themselves.\u00a0 The AGO has strong things to say about that as well.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Finally, as we have stated before, we believe that a Private Right of Action, along with AGO enforcement is the best policy for consumers.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Black Lives Matter Seattle-King County board member\u2019s Livio De La Cruz also discussed why a private right of action is so important:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>We know what it&#8217;s like to have our rights ignored. We want to have the power in our hands.\u00a0 We want the people to have that power.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>As Jennifer Lee of ACLU-WA highlighted in her testimony, organizations representing immigrant communities, people of color, and LGBTQ+ people are consistently opposing the bill.\u00a0 A couple more examples from the hearing:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Stan Shikuma of the Japanese American Citizen League\u2019s Seattle Chapter reminded us of the role data abuse played in the the mass incarceration of Japanese Americans and observed \u201cnever again is now.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>Derek Lum of Interim CDA (an organization focusing on social justice and equity for low income, Asian and Pacific Islanders, immigrant, and refugee communities) similarly said \u201chistory shows this will be abused&#8221;, citing over-policing of Black communities and post-9\/11 targeting of Muslims as well as Japanese internment.<\/li>\n<li>Eli Goss of OneAmerica (the largest immigrant and refugee advocacy organization in Washington State) discussed the bills pre-emption of local laws and the extremely low limits on fines &#8212; a maximum of $7500 per violation.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>I also testified, discussing Microsoft Researcher Luke Stark&#8217;s analogy that <a href=\"https:\/\/xrds.acm.org\/article.cfm?aid=3313129\">facial recognition is like plutonium<\/a>: something so toxic to society&#8217;s health that it needs to be strictly regulated.\u00a0 Following up on Eli&#8217;s comments about pre-emption, I also discussed the <a href=\"http:\/\/achangeiscoming.net\/2020\/02\/22\/bad-day-bad-bill-washington-house-hearing-sb-6821-washington-privacy-act\/\"> wave of cities and counties limiting and even banning facial recognition<\/a> \u2014 including <a href=\"https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/commentisfree\/2019\/may\/30\/san-francisco-ban-facial-recognition-surveillance\">San Francisco<\/a>, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.wbur.org\/bostonomix\/2019\/06\/28\/somerville-bans-government-use-of-facial-recognition-tech\">Somerville<\/a>, and <a href=\"https:\/\/www.sfchronicle.com\/bayarea\/article\/Oakland-bans-use-of-facial-recognition-14101253.php\">Oakland<\/a>.\u00a0 As written, SB 6821 would prohibit these local ordinances in Washington State, as well as rolling back current protections like Seattle\u2019s Broadband Privacy Rule.<\/p>\n<p>And my quick descriptions hear only scratches the surface of all the criticism of the bill as currently written.\u00a0 The two-page <a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/jennifer_e_lee\/status\/1230566920501387264\">fact sheet <\/a>from\u00a0 Consumer Federation of America, Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, EPIC Privacy, EFF, and ACLU-WA is a good summary if you&#8217;re interested; and it&#8217;s really worth <a href=\"https:\/\/app.leg.wa.gov\/committeeschedules?eventID=2020021280#\/House\/17360\/02-17-2020\/02-23-2020\/Schedule\/6281\/\/Bill\/\">watching the video of the hearing<\/a>. \u00a0 Still, even without those details, hopefully by now you&#8217;re convinced &#8230;<\/p>\n<p>The bill in its current form isn\u2019t anywhere close to a gold standard. In fact, as privacy advocate Deborah Pierce (former Executive Director of PrivacyActivism) said during the hearing, right now, it&#8217;s more like window dressing.\u00a0\u00a0 And a bad bill is worse than no bill; it will be hard to repair when legislators say it&#8217;s already a gold standard, but also because it gives more ammunition to the big tech companies who advocate using these unenforceable regulations as a model for other states.<\/p>\n<p>Fortunately, bills can still get changed even after they pass the Senate.\u00a0 I was really impressed by the ITED Committee.\u00a0 This was one of the best hearings I&#8217;ve been to since I can&#8217;t remember when, with excellent questions from legislators.\u00a0 The very solid <a href=\"https:\/\/app.leg.wa.gov\/committeeschedules\/Home\/Document\/216940#toolbar=0&amp;navpanes=0\">\u201cside-by-side\u201d comparison\u00a0<\/a> presented by staffer Yelena Baker, highlighted the much stronger regulations the committee had considered in their own earlier work.\u00a0 With luck, we could still emerge from this with a strong privacy bill that passes the House.<\/p>\n<p>And if you\u2019re in Washington, you can help!\u00a0 Please ask your legislators to <strong>oppose SB 6821 in its current form<\/strong>.\u00a0 You can give feedback <a href=\"https:\/\/app.leg.wa.gov\/pbc\/bill\/6281\">on the bill\u2019s web page<\/a> (make sure to click \u201cVerify District\u201d after you put in your address), by calling the Legislative Hotline at 1-800-562-6000 (TTY for Hearing Impaired 1-800-635-9993), by calling or emailing your legislators directly, or via <a href=\"https:\/\/www.takeaction.network\/xactions\/8980\">Take Action Network<\/a> (which is also a good place to track ongoing action alerts on privacy and other issues).<\/p>\n<p>If you\u2019re not sure what to say, you can keep it simple:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Please oppose SB 6821 in its current form. The State Attorney General\u2019s office says the bill is unenforceable as written. We deserve strong privacy protections.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>If you want to say more, here&#8217;s a handy chart from the ACLU-WA with four of the bill\u2019s biggest problems.<\/p>\n<h1><a href=\"https:\/\/www.aclu-wa.org\/pages\/washington-deserves-stronger-privacy-protections-washington-privacy-act-2ssb-6281\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-large wp-image-1253\" src=\"http:\/\/achangeiscoming.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/7\/2020\/02\/sb6281-problems-1024x499.jpg\" alt=\"Washington deserves stronger protections than the Washington Privacy Act, 2SSB 6281\" width=\"1024\" height=\"499\" \/><\/a><\/h1>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>\t\t\t\tSB 6281 did not fare well in the Washington House ITED Committee hearing\t\t<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[420],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1271","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-drafts"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/2024.thenexus.today\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1271","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/2024.thenexus.today\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/2024.thenexus.today\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/2024.thenexus.today\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/2024.thenexus.today\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1271"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/2024.thenexus.today\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1271\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/2024.thenexus.today\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1271"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/2024.thenexus.today\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1271"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/2024.thenexus.today\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1271"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}