CCPA Amendments Provide Some Clarity

September 26, 2019

CCPA-amendment
CCPA Amendments

Readers of this blog have been following our updates on prospective amendments to the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”). Among other amendments, Assembly Bill No. 1355 (the “Bill”) was passed by the California State Legislature on September 13, 2019. This CCPA amendment, if signed into law by Governor Newsom, will, among other things, rectify some of the drafting errors related to language included in the definition of “personal information,” disclosures required in website privacy policies and how the Attorney General can establish rules and procedures that companies should follow in order to comply with consumer request requirements.

How does the Bill amend the CCPA?

CCPA Amendments

By way of background, the CCPA was hastily written into law to prevent a citizen ballot initiative from going into effect. If the ballot initiative had passed, the State Legislature would not have been able to amend or repeal the proposition without voter input. In its haste to preempt the ballot initiative before the deadline, certain drafting errors were included by the Legislature in their preparation of the CCPA. The following CCPA amendments are meant to help clarify the original intention of the Legislature:

  • Section 1798.110 has been amended to clarify that a business’s privacy policy must disclose the categories of personal information that it has collected about consumers and not a particular consumer, as currently drafted. Additionally, the amendment clarifies that consumers have the right to request the specific pieces of personal information that any given business has collected about them, and not an obligation of the business to disclose that information;
  • The Bill amends the definition of “personal information” to correct an error which provided that deidentified or aggregate consumer information was not “publicly available information” within the meaning of the CCPA. Stated differently, the amendment makes clear that deidentified and aggregate consumer information is not “personal information;” and
  • The Bill creates Section 1798.185(b)(1), which provides the Attorney General with the discretion “to establish rules and procedures on how to process and comply with verifiable consumer requests for specific pieces of personal information relating to a household in order to address obstacles to implementation and privacy concerns.” The Attorney General is expected to provide guidance on this and many other aspects of the CCPA by and through implementing regulations to be released this Fall.

Preparing for the CCPA

Governor Newsom has until October 13, 2019, to accept or veto the CCPA amendments. Nevertheless, businesses should already be working on compliance strategies in order to best prepare for January 1, 2020, when the CCPA goes into effect. We will continue to provide informational updates as the deadline approaches. In the interim, if you are interested in learning more about this topic or require assistance in connection with consumer data privacy compliance for your business, please e-mail us at info@kleinmoynihan.com, or call us at (212) 246-0900.

The material contained herein is provided for informational purposes only and is not legal advice, nor is it a substitute for obtaining legal advice from an attorney. Each situation is unique, and you should not act or rely on any information contained herein without seeking the advice of an experienced attorney.

Attorney Advertising

Similar Blog Posts:

CCPA Compliance: Consumer Information Requests, Data Mapping and the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA)

Comparing the Washington Privacy Act (WPA) to the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA)

Reminder: Nevada Opt-Out Requirements Take Effect October 1

 

Share:

David Klein

David Klein is one of the most recognized attorneys in the technology, Internet marketing, sweepstakes, and telecommunications fields. Skilled at counseling clients on a broad range of technology-related matters, David Klein has substantial experience in negotiating and drafting complex licensing, marketing and Internet agreements.

Prerecorded Voice Claims Must be Factually Supported

On November 26, 2024, the United States District Court for the Southern District of California issued a noteworthy decision highlighting the importance of carefully contesting a plaintiff’s prerecorded voice claims. In Davis v. Rockloans Marketplace, LLC, the Court granted Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, in part,finding

Read More »

Trending Topics

Blog

Prerecorded Voice Claims Must be Factually Supported

On November 26, 2024, the United States District Court for the Southern District of California issued a noteworthy decision highlighting the importance of carefully contesting a plaintiff’s prerecorded voice claims. In Davis v. Rockloans Marketplace, LLC, the Court granted Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, in part,finding

Read More »