CCPA Amendment & Consumer Privacy Bills in California legislature in Feb. 2019
After reading yesterday that there are more than a dozen bills in the California legislature that could amend the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), we set out to track them down all of the potential CCPA amendments. There has already been one amendment and based on the statement of Assembly Member Ed Chau at the hearing of the Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee it seems likely there will be at least one more.
Here are descriptions of the new privacy bills that we found this legislative session (including a couple related pieces of legislation such as the data broker registration requirement which does mention the CCPA and the facial recognition technology disclosure which does not):
AB 25: Placeholder bill introduced by Assembly Member Chau to amend the CCPA in unspecified ways.
AB 288 – Social Media Privacy:
This bill was introduced by Assembly Member Cunningham and supported by coauthor Assembly Members Chen, Gallagher, Lackey, and Mayes. It would require social media companies to offer the option to permanently remove personally identifiable information of the user from the company’s database and records when a user closes their account. It also permits consumers who suffer damages as a result of a violation of the law to bring a civil action.
AB 846: This amendment, proposed by Assembly Members Burke, Low and Mullin, would seek to clarify that the CCPA does not prohibit consumer loyalty programs that offer incentives to consumers and allow businesses to continue to offer rewards, gift card, certificates, discounts or other benefits that are reasonably anticipated in exchange for the sharing of their personal information within the context of an ongoing business relationship.
AB 873 & 874: Placeholder bills introduced by Assembly Member Irwin to amend the CCPA in unspecified ways.
AB 950 – Consumer Privacy Protection:
The bill also establishes the Consumer Data Privacy Commission which shall be composed of members of academia, civil society and industry to provide guidance on the metrics and methodology to deetermine the monetary value of consumer data.
(List continues below the image)
AB 981 – Insurance Information and Privacy Protection Act Amendment:
This bill, introduced by Assembly Member Daly, would exempt insurance institutions, agents, insurance-support organizations and transactions subject to the Insurance Information and Privacy Protection Act from the California Consumer Privacy Act.
AB 1138 – Introduced by Assembly Member Gallagher:
This bill expresses an intent to create legislation that requires social media websites and applications to gather the opt-in consent of a parent or guardian before allowing account creation of a person under 16 years of age. The Department of Justice would establish guidelines for users to obtain such consent. In the introduction, it notes that the California Consumer Privacy Act prohibits the sale of personal information of a consumer less than 13 years of age without gathering consent from the parent or guardian.
AB 1146: This CCPA amendment, proposed by Assemblymember Berman, would create an exception for vehicle information shared between a new motor vehicle dealer and the vehicle’s manufacturer (or other specified parties) related to a vehicle repair under warranty or recall.
AB 1202 – Introduced by Assembly Member Chau:
It requires registration of data brokers and a civil penalty of $100 per day for each day a broker fails to register.
AB 1281 – Facial Recognition Technology Disclosure
This proposed bill by Assembly Member Chau would require businesses that use facial recognition technology to disclose that usage in a clear and conspicuous sign at the entrance of every location using it. A violation of California’s unfair competition law occurs each day that such a disclosure does not occur.
AB 1355: This bill, introduced by Assembly Member Chau, makes changes to the definitions of the CCPA including a few nonsubstantive changes (makes lower case some terms) and a clarification that deidentified or aggregate consumer information is not personal information.
AB 1395 – Smart Speaker Privacy Act:
This bill, introduced by Assembly Member Jordan Cunningham, would prohibit smart speaker devices and their manufacturers from saving or storing records of commands, requests or conversations. It prohibits such recording even if a term or phrase (often called a wake word) is used. It would exclude from the definition of a smart speaker device a cell phone, tablet, or laptop computer with mobile data access, as well as a pager.
AB 1416: This bill, introduced by Assembly Member Cooley, would alter sections of Section 1798.145(a) of the CCPA. This section restricts the obligations imposed on businesses from restricting certain activities. The proposed changes add a restriction on the implications of the law on disclosures to assist another person or government agency. It also extends the legal exception to include “any rules or regulations” and alters the section on exercising or defending legal claims to provide four specific areas where the law does not limit a business’ collection, use, retention, sale, or disclosure of personal information.
AB 1465: This proposed bill makes nonsubstantive changes to the CCPA. It appears to cleanup capitalization decisions and delete the space between “Web site” in the new California privacy law.
This bill is a more extensive version of SB 753.
AB 1564: This proposed CCPA amendment by Assembly Member Bloom would modify the toll-free telephone number requirement to provide for the use of either a toll-free number or an email address.
AB 1758: This bill proposed by Assembly Member Chau would make a nonsubstantive change to Section 1798.100(e) by eliminating the word “any” before personal information and replace the word “such” with “that”. Section 100(e) is the one that permits a business to not retain personal information for a single, one-time transaction
AB 1760: This bill, introduced by Assembly Member Wicks, makes a one word change nonsubstantive change to section 1798.105(a) of the CCPA. It replaces “which” with “that” in the consumer right to request a business delete any personal information about the consumer.
UPDATE: AB 1760 is going to be the #PrivacyForAll bill supported by the ACLU of Northern California and other consumer organizations. It provides several extensions to the CCPA including an opt-in right and application to sharing data.
SB 561: This is the bill introduced by Senator Jackson and is supported by the California Attorney General. It makes three changes to the CCPA to extend the private right of action, eliminate the 30 day cure for businesses before AG enforcement, and alters the AG guidance provision.
We covered SB 561 in greater detail in a blog post yesterday.
SB 752: This bill, proposed by Senator Stern, makes a nonsubstantive change to Section 1798.125(b)(1) of the CCPA. It strikes the word “by” from this section and replaces it with the word “from”.
Other Relevant Posts:
Next Stop for CCPA Amendments AB-25 and AB-874 is an Assembly Floor Vote
Highlights of the CA Privacy Committee Hearing Yesterday on CCPA Amendments
How to Prepare for CCPA Compliance Given the Uncertain Amendments and Regulations
CCPA Amendments to be Heard in April 23rd California Assembly Privacy Committee Hearing
Senate Judiciary Committee Recommends SB 561, the Expanded CCPA Private Right of Action
Latest on the Proposed CCPA Amendments
AB-25 Proposes CCPA Amendment to Exclude Employees from New Privacy Law
CCPA Regulation Recommendations by EFF to CA Attorney General
Highlights of CCPA Rulemaking Comments by IAB and ANA
California AG Supports Proposed CCPA Amendments in SB 561
CA Dems Defend CCPA Against Preemption; California Holds CCPA Hearing on Changes
California GOP Defend CCPA Against Federal Preemption
More Technical Amendments Suggested for CCPA; CA GOP Introduce Another Privacy Bill
Advertising & Marketing Groups Send AG Letter Seeking Flexibility on CCPA