NYAG Proposed Settlement for Credential Stuffing Attacks with 3-Business-Day Access Request Response

On September 15, 2020, the New York Attorney General (NYAG) announced a proposed settlement with Dunkin’ Brands, relating to brute force and credential stuffing attacks against members’ online accounts (including stored value cards). Dunkin’ does not admit or deny any of the NYAG’s allegations in the complaint. (New York v. Dunkin’ Brands, No. 451787/2019 (N.Y. Sup. Sept. 5, 2020).

2019 Complaint

According to the NYAG’s 2019 complaint, Dunkin’ had been the subject of hacker attacks attempting to breach its members’ online accounts and steal money from the stored value cards that members registered to those accounts. The … Continue Reading

CCPA – Health Research Bill Passes Legislature

Although the bill to amend the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) to extend the so-called “B-to-B” and “employee” exceptions for one more year has garnered many headlines, the California legislature passed a second CCPA amendment (AB 713) that will be of interest to anyone involved in medical research as the new bill would ease some CCPA restrictions on research. The changes pertaining to healthcare data are expected to pass and are clearly responsive to additional needs to share information and conduct research on potential treatments and vaccines for the ongoing COVID pandemic. The bill has been sent to … Continue Reading

Schrems II: recent developments – waiting is harder

In the immediate aftermath of the Schrems II judgement, Bruno Gencarelli (Head of the International data flows and protection unit at the European Commission) said that “Schrems II is data transfers from theory to practice”.  There have been several major developments over the last couple of weeks (explained below) which show this to be an accurate assessment.  Companies can no longer “do nothing” in the hope that the difficult implications will go away.  Regulators are starting to investigate.  Complaints are being submitted. A taskforce has been set up. The Swiss data protection authority (DPA) also thinks Privacy … Continue Reading

Algorithmic Decision-making and the UK ICO’s Guidance on AI

Algorithmic decision-making has been in the news of late. From Ofqual’s downgrading of students’ A-level results[1] to the complaint lodged by None of Your Business’ against the credit rating agency CRIF for failing (amongst other things) to be transparent about the reasons why a particular applicant had been given a negative rating[2]. We have been reminded of the potential backlash that could result from decisions that are perceived as incorrect or unfair by algorithms where the workings of which are largely unknown to the individuals they affect. This presents challenges for organisations which are increasingly adopting Artificial … Continue Reading

Key takeaways for the private sector from The Bridges v South Wales police facial recognition case

On 11 August 2020, the Court of Appeal (CA) handed down its judgement in the case of R (on the application of Edward BRIDGES) v The Chief Constable of South Wales Police.  The court found that the use of automated facial recognition technology (AFT) by South Wales Police (SWP) was unlawful and did not comply with Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the right to respect for private and family life) (the Convention).

Whilst this judgement concerned the use of AFT in the public sector, the case provides interesting  … Continue Reading

An “enhanced” Privacy Shield is being negotiated – third time a charm?

On 10 August, the European Commission and the US Department of Commerce confirmed that talks have begun between the EU and US for an “enhanced” Privacy Shield.

This will be the third attempt to revise this framework, following the invalidation of Safe Harbor in 2015 and Privacy Shield in July 2020. Third time a charm? We’re not so sure.

By way of recap, in Schrems II, the court made clear that Privacy Shield was invalid for three main reasons:

  1. US surveillance rules are disproportionate
  2. There is a lack of proper oversight over US surveillance programmes
  3. EU individuals do not
Continue Reading

Schrems II landmark ruling: our recommendations

On 16 July 2020, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) published its decision in the landmark case Data Protection Commissioner v Facebook Ireland Ltd, Maximilian Schrems and intervening parties, Case C-311/18 (known as the Schrems II case).  While the EU-US Privacy Shield (Privacy Shield) has been completely invalidated, the Standard Contractual Clauses (SCCs) remain valid, but with strict conditions.

Our recent briefing provides a detailed analysis on the judgement, but here are our recommendations on what organisations should consider doing next:

  • Monitor guidance updates from the European Data Protection Board (EDPB)
Continue Reading

Schrems II: The US Perspective and where do we go from here?

Schrems II calls into question all transfers of personal information out of the EU that involve export to a country without an adequacy finding.  While this affects countries in every region of the world, it does have particular ramifications for the US.

US companies are likely to bear the brunt of this decision.  First, because the underlying complaint concerns how Facebook transferred personal data to the US, Schrems II takes particular umbrage with US “mass” surveillance laws, which are unlikely to change in the short term.  Second, the US is still the largest economy in the world and information is … Continue Reading

Schrems II landmark ruling: Privacy Shield is invalid, Standard Contractual Clauses are valid but court puts obligations on parties and authorities

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has today published its decision in the landmark case, known as Schrems II. While Privacy Shield has been completely invalidated, the Standard Contractual Clauses (SCCs) remain valid, but the court has emphasised obligations on the parties to the SCCs  and Data Protection Authorities which have the potential to restrict when they can be used.

Here is a very short first summary:

  1. Privacy Shield is invalid.  This is on the basis that the access and use of EU personal data by US authorities are not restricted in a way
Continue Reading

Germany’s Federal Supreme Court provisionally confirms Facebook’s use of personal data is alleged abuse of dominant market position

Facebook’s extensive collection of user-related data must be put on hold in Germany for the time being following a decision of Germany’s Federal Supreme Court on June 23, 2020. In summary proceedings, the Federal Supreme Court overturned an earlier order of the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf that – pending the outcome of an appeal by Facebook – had suspended the effect of a prohibition order issued by Germany’s Federal Cartel Office (FCO) in 2019 restricting Facebook’s collection of data. The FCO’s prohibition order will therefore be effective during Facebook’s ongoing appeal.

The case concerns the terms of use that … Continue Reading

LexBlog