Under the new version of ADPPA, Butler said, some forms of targeting will remain popular, especially first-party data-driven targeting. If you shop for shoes on Target.com, Target may still use that information to show you ads for shoes when you’re on another website. What it won’t be able to do is match your shopping history with everything else you do on the web and on your phone to show you ads for things you never told them you wanted. Nor can Facebook and Google continue to track you by placing trackers on nearly every free website or app you use, in order to create a profile about you for advertisers.
“If they’re tracking your activity on third-party websites, that’s sensitive data, and they can’t process that data for targeted advertising purposes,” Butler said.
To the extent the new bill still allows targeted advertising, it would require companies to grant users opt-out options — while prohibiting the kinds of tactics companies commonly use to promote urge users to click “Accept All Cookies” under GDPR. And it would direct the Federal Trade Commission to create a general opt-out standard that companies would have to respect, meaning users could opt out of all targeted advertising within one click. (It’s a Important features California’s recently passed privacy law.)
The advertising industry seems to agree that the bill would mark a fundamental change. Yesterday, the National Association of Advertisers, a trade group, issued a statement opposing the bill, saying it “bans companies from collecting and using basic online activity and demographic data.” for common and responsible advertising purposes.”
In addition to the data-reducing approach, the new bill has quite a few provisions that data privacy experts have long called for, including transparency standards, anti-discrimination rules, increased Increased scrutiny of data brokers and new cybersecurity requirements.
Federal privacy laws have become a white-whale issue in DC over the past few years. As of 2019, a bipartisan agreement is said to have only just begun. The effort continues to stall as Democrats and Republicans are divided on two key issues: whether a federal bill should prioritize state privacy laws and whether it should created “private action” that would allow individuals, not just the government, to sue companies for infringing or not. Democrats are generally against preemption and in favor of private action, Republicans are the opposite.
The new bill represents a long-awaited compromise on those issues. It prioritizes state law, but with some exceptions. (Most notably, it empowers California’s brand new privacy agency to enforce ADPPA in the state.) And it has limited individual action powers, with limitations on the damages people can do. can sue.
The bill inevitably has other shortcomings. Popular opt-out requests are good, but it won’t make much sense until the biggest browsers, especially Chrome and Safari, add this feature. The bill gives the FTC new authority to enact the rules and enforce them, but it doesn’t direct any new resources to the agency, which already lacks the staff and funds to handle things on a regular basis. its headquarters.
