Microsoft, IA Say Washington Privacy Bill Strongest in US
Washington is on the verge of passing the nation's strongest privacy bill, representatives for Microsoft and Internet Association told state House lawmakers Friday, while raising concerns about a private right of action (see 1902280050). Consumer and minority groups called the bill weak, arguing against allowing overly permissive policies for facial recognition technology. House members, who will next meet Tuesday, are amending bill language.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
The bill that passed the Senate borrows the best aspects of the EU’s general data protection regulation, the California Consumer Privacy Act and the Fair Credit Reporting Act, Microsoft Senior Director-Public Policy Ryan Harkins told the House Innovation, Technology and Economic Development Committee. Like California’s law, it recognizes companies have compelling reasons to retain data and carves out exemptions.
IA opposes House language that would implement a private right of action for consumers to sue individually, said State Government Affairs Director Rose Feliciano. State attorney general enforcement is done in a transparent manner, and private action will result in confidential settlements, she said. The Senate bill's author, Reuven Carlyle (D), said the only winners with a private right to action are attorneys.
If this were the strongest U.S. privacy bill, consumer groups would be cheering, said ACLU-Washington Technology and Liberty Project Director Shankar Narayan. He called the facial recognition provisions included in the Senate version weak, and said data controls fall short of the GDPR and the CCPA. Consumer Reports Policy Analyst Maureen Mahoney called it a weak bill that would set a terrible precedent for other states. Consumers can opt out of data sharing in the Senate version, but companies can work around that by listing broad uses of collection, she said. The bill as discussed doesn’t protect minority communities, which are subjected to stricter surveillance practices, said Samroz Jakvani of the Muslim Association of Puget Sound.
On behalf of AG Bob Ferguson (D), Emilia Jones said her office strongly supports a private right of action, though the AG’s role should be separate. The office has concerns about the impact of facial recognition technology on minority communities, she said, arguing human review won’t solve the inherent biases of the technology.
The Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs opposes the legislation based on the impact on law enforcement use of facial recognition technology, said Policy Director James McMahan. The Senate legislation seems to allow wide use of the technology for industry, but it hampers law enforcement efforts, he said. Rights of due process aren't exempted from facial recognition technology, he said. State Rep. Norma Smith (R) would like to explore that disparity further.
The legislation is strong because it establishes consumer rights while being workable and flexible for groups it regulates, said Washington Chief Privacy Officer Alex Alben. People should have a right to walk around in public without being surveilled, he added.