Topic: Regulatory response

Subscribe to Regulatory response RSS feed

First multi-million Euro GDPR fine: Google LLC fined €50 million under GDPR for transparency and consent infringements in relation to use of personal data for personalized ads

Norton Rose Fulbright - Data Protection Report blog

On January 21,2019 the French data protection authority (the CNIL) imposed a major fine on the U.S. Google entity, Google LLC. It follows two complaints filed as soon as the GDPR came into force by two consumer rights associations, None of Your Business and La Quadrature du Net.

We focus here on four key aspects of the decision: (a) why the Irish Data Protection Commission (Irish DPC) did not take the case; (b) the consent mechanism failings; (c) the privacy policy failings; and (d) the amount of the fine.… Continue Reading

European Commission adopts adequacy decision on Japan

By Lara White (UK) and Shiv Daddar (UK) on January 24, 2019 Posted in Regulatory response

Data Protection Report - Norton Rose Fulbright

On January 23^rd 2019, the European Commission adopted its adequacy decision in relation to the export of personal data from the European Union (EU) to Japan. Concurrently, Japan has adopted an equivalent decision in relation to the export of personal data from Japan to the EU. Such mutual decision is the result of two-years of dialogue and negotiations between both parties.

According to a joint statement issued by Věra Jourová (Commissioner for Justice, Consumers and Gender Equality) and Haruhi Kumazawa (Commissioner of the Personal Information Protection Commission of Japan), “these mutual adequacy findings create the world’s largest … Continue Reading

Pennsylvania Supreme Court holds common law duty for employers extends to protecting sensitive employee information

By Andrea D'Ambra (US) and Max Kellogg (US) on December 7, 2018 Posted in Compliance and risk management, Data breach, General, Regulatory response

On November 21, 2018, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court broke new ground by holding that employers have a legal duty to take reasonable care to safeguard its employees’ sensitive personal information from cyberattacks. Dittman v. UPMC, 2018 Pa. LEXIS 6072199 (Pa. Nov. 21, 2018).… Continue Reading

EDPB clarifies territorial scope of the GDPR

By Marcus Evans (UK) and Anna Rudawski (US) on December 6, 2018 Posted in Compliance and risk management, Data breach, Regulatory response

On November 23, 2018, the European Data Protection Board (“EDPB”) issued highly anticipated draft Guidelines (the “Guidelines”) on the territorial scope of the GDPR. See our previous blog posts on the GDPR here and here. The Guidelines provide some clarity around the scope and applicability of the GDPR to data Controllers and Processors both inside and outside the EU.… Continue Reading

New China Guideline for Internet Personal Information Security Protection

By Barbara Li (CN) and Bohua Yao (CN) on December 5, 2018 Posted in Compliance and risk management, Data breach, Regulatory response

On November 30, 2018 the Cyber Security Protection Bureau, under the auspices of the PRC Ministry of Public Security (the “MPS”), issued a draft Guideline for Internet Personal Information Security Protection (the “Guideline”) along with a request for public comments.… Continue Reading

California Consumer Privacy Act blog series: Covered entities

By Jeewon Kim Serrato (US), Steve Roosa (US) and Alexis Wilpon (US) on August 16, 2018 Posted in CCPA, Compliance and risk management, Regulatory response

This is the Data Protection Report’s second post in a series of blog posts that will break down the major elements of the CCPA which will culminate in a webinar on the CCPA in October. This blog focuses on covered entities. Stay tuned for additional posts and information about our upcoming webinar on the CCPA.

California’s new privacy law, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) grants California residents extensive new privacy rights. One of the more significant aspects of the law however, is the number of business entities to which it applies. Companies around the world must comply with the … Continue Reading

Overview of Thailand Draft Personal Data Protection Act

By Natpakal Rerknithi (TH), Anna Gamvros (HK) and Ruby Kwok (HK) on August 6, 2018 Posted in Regulatory response

Data protection laws in Asia continue to be introduced and updated. One of the most recent developments in South East Asia is in Thailand. On 22 May 2018, the Thai Cabinet approved in principle a revised draft of Thailand’s first personal data protection act (Draft Act). This Draft Act is currently under consideration by the Council of State.

Thailand currently does not have any specific law regulating data protection. The Office of the Prime Minister first published the Draft Act in 2014. The Draft Act has undergone several rounds of changes and this article aims to give a high level … Continue Reading

The European Parliament asks for the suspension of the privacy shield

By Chris Cwalina (US), Jeewon Kim Serrato (US), Susan Ross (US) and Tristan Coughlin* (US) on July 17, 2018 Posted in Regulatory response

On July 5, the European Parliament passed a non-binding resolution, asking the European Commission, the EU’s executive body, to suspend the Privacy Shield framework. The EU-US Privacy Shield, designed by the US Department of Commerce and the European Commission, provides a mechanism for companies to transfer personal data between the EU and the US while remaining compliant with EU data protection laws.

The European Commission passed the data-sharing privacy framework on July 12, 2016, after its precursor, Safe Harbor, was struck down by the European Court of Justice on October 6, 2015.

Since the European Parliament’s resolution is … Continue Reading

US states pass data protection laws on the heels of the GDPR

By Jeewon Kim Serrato (US), Chris Cwalina (US), Anna Rudawski (US), Tristan Coughlin* (US) and Katey Fardelmann (US) on July 9, 2018 Posted in Compliance and risk management, Regulatory response

Several U.S. states have recently introduced and passed legislation to expand data breach notification rules and to mirror some of the protections provided by Europe’s newly enacted General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”). See our previous blog posts on GDPR here and here. Like their European counterparts, these state laws are intended to provide consumers with greater transparency and control over their personal data. The California and Vermont laws, in particular, go beyond breach notification and require companies to make significant changes in their data processing operations. See our earlier post on the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”) here.… Continue Reading

GDPR is upon us: are you ready for what comes next?

By Jeewon Kim Serrato (US), Steven Hadwin (UK) and Marcus Evans (UK) on May 23, 2018 Posted in Compliance and risk management, Regulatory response

The wait is finally over—this Friday the European Union General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) will come into force. For many readers of this post, a huge amount of work will have been done in recent months in building up to compliance with the new regime. However, the challenges of GDPR certainly don’t end on the date this law goes into implementation. We have shared below some interesting points that we’ve seen arising recently, all of which relate to how things are likely to develop from today onwards, including enforcement predictions, challenges related to operationalizing data subject access procedures, and how … Continue Reading

UK NIS Regulations impose new cybersecurity obligations (and a new penalties regime) on operators of essential services and digital service providers in the UK

By Steven Hadwin (UK) on May 10, 2018 Posted in Compliance and risk management, Regulatory response

The UK NIS Regulations (implementing the NIS Directive) come into force in the UK today (10 May 2018). These Regulations have received limited press attention, in part due to the emphasis that has been placed on GDPR implementation. However, the NIS Regulations represent a significant change in the legal environment relating to cybersecurity in the UK.… Continue Reading

FTC, privacy, vendor due diligence and opt-in consent

By Susan Ross (US) on May 10, 2018 Posted in Regulatory response

On April 30, 2018, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) released for public comment an administrative complaint and proposed consent agreement with mobile phone manufacturer BLU Products Inc. and its owner and president. Although the FTC has entered into many settlements relating to privacy and data security, this proposed settlement is particularly noteworthy for two reasons: (1) the FTC allegation that a company’s failure to implement appropriate security procedures to oversee a vendor’s security practices (including a lack of vendor due diligence) can violate Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act; and (2) the proposed remedy includes a separate … Continue Reading

Singapore PDPC responds to feedback on public consultation on approaches to managing personal data

By Stella Cramer (SG), Wilson Ang (SG), Jessica Paulin (SG), David Olds (SG) and Jeremy Lua (SG) on March 11, 2018 Posted in Compliance and risk management, Data breach, Regulatory response

On 1 February 2018, Singapore Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC) released its response to feedback on its public consultation on approaches to managing personal data in the digital economy, which took place in Q3 2017 (the Public Consultation). The purpose of the Public Consultation, was to seek public feedback on proposed changes to Singapore’s data protection regime, the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA). The key proposed changes to the PDPA include the relaxation of the consent requirement to collect, use and disclose personal data in Singapore and the introduction of a mandatory data breach notification regime.

We set out below … Continue Reading

WP29 brings Binding Corporate Rules in line with the GDPR

By Lara White (UK) and Anna Rudawski (US) on February 28, 2018 Posted in Regulatory response

On February 6, 2018, the Article 29 Working Party (WP29) adopted updated guidelines on Binding Corporate Rules (“BCRs“), which replace the previous WP29 working documents 153 and 195 on BCRs and Processor BCRs.… Continue Reading

Amended Colorado bill aims to enhance data privacy laws

By on February 21, 2018 Posted in Regulatory response

As Data Protection Report posted on January 29, 2018, lawmakers in Colorado are considering legislation that, if enacted, would significantly strengthen Colorado’s data privacy protections. On Wednesday, February 14, 2018, an amended bill passed unanimously in Colorado’s House Committee on State, Veterans and Military Affairs.… Continue Reading

Connecticut case finds health care privacy cause of action

By Susan Ross (US) on February 15, 2018 Posted in Regulatory response

On January 16, 2018, in Byrne v. Avery, the Connecticut Supreme Court unilaterally created a new state law cause of action for violation of a patient’s health care privacy. (Byrne v. Avery Center for Obstetrics & Gynecology, P.C., 327 Conn. 540, __ A.3d __ (Jan. 16, 2018)). Particularly noteworthy is the new standard for a physician’s level of care: compliance with HIPAA. In other words, violation of HIPAA can lead to a state law claim in Connecticut, but the decision does NOT create a private right of action under HIPAA.… Continue Reading

Blocking illegal or fraudulent ‘robocalls’: FCC rulemaking, with FTC comments

By Allison Lange Garrison (US) and Susan Ross (US) on February 13, 2018 Posted in Regulatory response

Illegal robocalls are a “scourge.” So says FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, and most consumers likely agree. Both the FCC and the FTC (each of which has jurisdiction over some aspects of telemarketing regulation) are actively pursuing ways to curb illegal and fraudulent robocalls. The FCC issued a report and order in November 2017 authorizing telecommunications providers to block certain types of calls considered “highly likely to be illegitimate.” In late January 2018, the FTC responded with a staff letter expressing support for the FCC’s efforts and offering suggestions for addressing erroneously blocked calls. … Continue Reading

February 15 deadline looms for first DFS Cybersecurity Certification

By Kathleen Scott (US) and Susan Ross (US) on February 8, 2018 Posted in Regulatory response

February 15, 2018, is quickly approaching and any entity subject to New York’s cybersecurity regulation (23 NYCRR Part 500) must file its first annual certification of compliance with the New York State Department of Financial Services (DFS) by that date. New York imposes cybersecurity requirements on all entities (covered entities) subject to the jurisdiction of the DFS, which include not only banks and insurers, but also any persons regulated by the DFS, including the newest DFS licensees, those engaged in virtual currency business activity.… Continue Reading

Data breach notification to become mandatory in Australia from 22 February 2018

By Jim Lennon (AU) and Edward Odendaal (AU) on February 7, 2018 Posted in Regulatory response

Privacy compliance will become even more important for all companies in Australia now that the mandatory data breach notification scheme has been enacted.

From 22 February 2018, certain data breaches (known as “eligible data breaches”) will need to be notified to the Australian Privacy Commissioner and affected individuals. Previously, notification of data breaches was optional.… Continue Reading

China issues Personal Information Security Specification

By Barbara Li (CN) on February 5, 2018 Posted in Regulatory response

On 29 December 2017 the Standardization Administration of China issued an Information Security Technology – Personal Information Security Specification（GB/T 35273-2017）(the “Specification”), which will come into effect on 1 May 2018. … Continue Reading

US HHS OCR issues cyber extortion newsletter

By Alexis Wilpon (US) on February 1, 2018 Posted in Regulatory response

This week, the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office for Civil Rights (OCR) published a January 2018 newsletter focusing on “cyber extortion.” Cyber extortion often involves an attacker gaining access to an organization’s computer system, stealing sensitive information, and threatening to publish the information. Healthcare and public health organizations are often the targets of these attacks, so affected data frequently includes protected health information, or PHI. The OCR newsletter indicates that incidents of cyber extortion have been steadily increasing over the past several years and will continue to disrupt many organizations.… Continue Reading

New California “sanctuary” law restricts access to workers and their records

By Allison Lange Garrison (US) on January 30, 2018 Posted in Regulatory response

A new state law places California businesses on the front line in responding to federal immigration enforcement actions. Effective January 1, 2018, AB 450 requires California employers to protect employees and their private information from warrantless “workplace raids” and I-9 form demands, and to warn employees who become targets of an immigration investigation.… Continue Reading

New U.S. defense bill targets drones, raises potential privacy and security concerns

By Susan Ross (US) on January 30, 2018 Posted in Regulatory response

The National Defense Authorization Act of 2018 (NDAA),[1] signed into law in December 2017, did not only authorize United States defense spending for the 2018 fiscal year – it also contained a section devoted to unmanned aerial systems.… Continue Reading