Articles Posted in Consumer Law

Published on: | by

The Right to Be Forgotten (RTBF) under Article 17 of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is a legal right that allows individuals to request the deletion of their personal data by data controllers (organizations that collect and manage personal data). It is also known as the right to erasure. Article 17 aims to empower individuals by giving them control over their personal information, particularly in the context of the digital world where data can be easily accessible and long-lasting.

Key Elements of Article 17 (Right to Erasure):

1. Right to Request Erasure: Individuals can request the deletion of their personal data from a data controller if one of the following conditions applies:

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

California has enacted several laws to protect consumer privacy with one of the most significant being the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) which was expanded by the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA). These laws grant consumers various rights regarding their personal data, including, but not necessarily limited to, the right to request the deletion of their personal information. Here’s how these rights apply to deleting personal information from third-party websites:

Key Consumer Rights Under CCPA/CPRA

1. Right to Request Deletion (Under CCPA/CPRA)

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Virtual Reality (VR) technology is rapidly transforming industries from entertainment and gaming to education and healthcare. As VR becomes more integrated into daily life, it also raises unique legal questions. In California, a state known for being at the forefront of both technology and regulation, various laws already impact VR technology, even though there are no VR-specific laws currently on the books. This article explores the key areas of California law that intersect with the use and development of VR, including privacy, data protection, consumer protection, and intellectual property.

Privacy and Data Protection Laws

Privacy is one of the most critical legal issues in VR, especially in California, which has some of the strongest privacy protections in the United States. Two major pieces of legislation stand out:

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

The genetic testing company, 23andMe, known for its popular DNA ancestry and health reports, is facing a class-action lawsuit following a data breach that resulted in the personal information of Jewish customers being exposed on the dark web.

The so-called “dark web” is the world wide web content that exists on darknets: overlay networks that use the Internet but require specific software, configurations, or authorization to access. Through the dark web, private computer networks can communicate and conduct business anonymously without divulging identifying information, such as a user’s location. The dark web forms a small part of the deep web, the part of the web not indexed by web search engines, although sometimes the term deep web is mistakenly used to refer specifically to the dark web. The breach raises significant concerns not only about the security of sensitive genetic data but also the potential for this information to be exploited in harmful ways. This lawsuit underscores the growing need for robust cybersecurity measures in the genetic testing industry.

The Data Breach

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

In the digital era, where personal interactions, commerce, and even the way we perceive reality have migrated to online platforms, data privacy has become a paramount concern. Among the technology giants, Facebook, now rebranded as Meta, stands as a towering figure in the realm of social media and virtual reality. As the company’s influence expands, its data collection practices, utilization of pixel technology, and implications for wiretapping laws have sparked profound discussions about the balance between innovation and individual privacy.

The Meta Transformation

In October 2021, Facebook announced a significant rebranding effort, transforming itself into Meta. This rebranding signaled the company’s intention to shift its focus towards the metaverse—a digital realm where virtual reality, augmented reality, and interconnected experiences converge. This transition raises pertinent questions about data privacy within the metaverse, as these interconnected experiences often involve the seamless sharing of personal information.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

The rapid growth of the internet and the widespread use of social media platforms have provided individuals with new avenues for communication, networking, and information sharing. However, the rise of the digital age has also brought about the concerning issue of internet cyberspace harassment. Online harassment encompasses various forms of abusive behavior, including cyberbullying, online stalking, revenge porn, hate speech, and other forms of malicious online activities. To combat this pervasive problem, lawmakers around the world have been enacting laws and regulations specifically targeting internet cyberspace harassment. In this article, we will explore the significance of these laws and regulations in addressing online harassment and ensuring a safer digital environment.

Defining Internet Harassment

Internet cyberspace harassment refers to the intentional use of digital platforms to harass, intimidate, threaten, or harm individuals or groups. It can take various forms, such as sending abusive messages, sharing explicit or defamatory content, spreading false information, or engaging in persistent online stalking. These acts of harassment can have severe psychological, emotional, and even physical consequences for the victims.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

The franchise and business opportunity rules mandate sellers to issue a clear and concise disclosure document at least ten days before the consumer pays funds. The document must include the following information:

  1. Names, addresses, and telephone numbers of other purchasers;
  2. Fully-audited financial statement of the seller;
Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

The federal Lanham Act (“Lanham Act”) allows civil actions for false advertising that misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin of goods or services. See 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) stating in relevant part as follows:

(1) Any person who, on or in connection with any goods or services, or any container for goods, uses in commerce any word, term, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof, or any false designation of origin, false or misleading description of fact, or false or misleading representation of fact, which: (A) Is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association of such person with another person, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of his or her goods, services, or commercial activities by another person, or (B) In commercial advertising or promotion, misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin of his or her or another person’s goods, services, or commercial activities, shall be liable in a civil action by any person who believes that he or she is or is likely to be damaged by such act.

(2) As used in this subsection, the term “any person” includes any State, instrumentality of a State or employee of a State or instrumentality of a State acting in his or her official capacity. Any State, and any such instrumentality, officer, or employee, shall be subject to the provisions of this chapter in the same manner and to the same extent as any nongovernmental entity.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

It is not legal or ethical to engage in false or misleading advertising for selling products or services. This is especially true when the advertising harms consumers or competitors in violation of state or federal laws.

A business that uses misleading words for the sale of a product or service can be sanctioned by state or federal agencies. The use of keywords like healthy, organic, gluten free, or 100% natural can be deceptive. The usage of false scientific support claims or endorsements may be unethical. The posting of a false or deceptive picture or video can be against the law. There have been instances where the advertiser used a false or misleading color to make its product look different. Also, there have been instances where the advertiser made a false claim that its product contained a certain product or it had clinically proven health benefits to enhance sales.

A business that engages in deceptive pricing by hiding true fees or surcharges can be sanctioned by state or federal agencies. In most cases, the consumers are misled by not knowing the true price of the product or service – e.g., a communication service provider hides the cell phone bill’s real charges from the consumer when signing up for service.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

A business organization has legal responsibilities when it comes to data access, control, and management. The government has recently issued an opinion regarding disclosure requirements for the so-called “inferred data” which comprise of internally generated inferences within the context of a consumer’s right of access request. California Civil Code Section 1798.140(v)(1)(K) defines “inferred data” as inferences drawn from a consumer’s personal information to create a profile which reflects the consumer’s preferences, characteristics, psychological trends, predispositions, behaviors, attitudes, intelligence, abilities and aptitudes.

Under California Civil Code Section 1798.110(a)(1), consumers have the right to know the specific pieces of personal information a business organization has collected about them. The California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”) did not address inferred data in its provisions and only implied that businesses should disclose personal data they collected from consumers. However, the Attorney General’s Office issued Opinion No. 20-303 to address whether business organizations that are subject to the CCPA should include inferred data when a consumer submits a Data Subject Access Request (“DSAR”). In short, with limited exceptions (e.g., trade secret protection), the answer was affirmative.

The question is whether inferred data elements fall under trade secret protection rules. In his opinion, the state Attorney General stated that the CCPA only mandates a business to share the product of its internal algorithms even though the algorithms themselves are protected trade secrets. In fact, internal algorithms fall under the classic definition of trade secrets because they’re not publicly accessible to competitors, they confer a competitive advantage, their secrecy is maintained from external disclosure. See California Civil Code § 3426.1(d)(2) for more information about trade secrets. In fact, trade secrets include customer lists, processes, and software or commercial methods. It is conceivable, and probably foreseeable that, a business may withhold inferences because they’re protected trade secrets but it has the burden of proof. So, in short, a business has two options when it comes to disclosing inferred data. First, it can fulfill the DSAR according to the most recent opinion and face the risk of exposing its internal algorithm. Second, it can withhold the data inferences and face the risk of receiving a non-compliance notice from the state Attorney General’s office.

Continue Reading ›