Online advertising – or “adtech”, as it is often referred to – does not mix well with many privacy laws, beginning with the GDPR. In recent years since GDPR went into effect, privacy advocates have increased their demands on EU regulators to more deeply scrutinize targeting practices and how data is shared within the advertising ecosystem, in particular when it comes to real-time bidding (RTB). Complaints have been filed by many privacy-minded organizations, and all of them allege that, by its very nature, RTB constitutes a “wide-scale and systemic” breach of Europe’s privacy laws. This is because RTB relies on the massive collection, accumulation and dissemination of detailed behavioral data about individuals who use the internet.
Continue Reading Key Takeaways from the Recent Grindr Decision and “Tentative” $11M Fine

As we all know, the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield framework, the cross-border transfer mechanism relied upon by over 5,000 U.S. entities until just over a month ago, was recently invalidated by the CJEU in the Schrems II case (see here for our last post following the ruling). So what next?
Continue Reading Addressing Cross-Border Transfers from the EU Following the Schrems II Ruling

Despite three annual reviews by European Union Commissioners, the European Court of Justice (CJEU) invalidated the Privacy Shield and called into question many transfers of personal data pursuant to the Standard Contractual Clauses on July 16.  At stake are transfers of EU personal data to thousands of U.S. companies that rely on personal data being transferred from the EU. The case is colloquially known as “Schrems II” as it is the second case involving Maximillian Schrems (Case C-311/18 Data Protection Commissioner v Facebook Ireland and Maximillian Schrems). Mr. Schrems’ first case resulted in an invalidation of the EU-US Safe Harbor, the Privacy Shield’s predecessor in 2015.
Continue Reading Schrems II: EU Personal Data Transfers to the U.S. and the Invalidation of the Privacy Shield

Similar to the months before the GDPR went into effect at the end of May 2018, companies are now actively preparing for compliance with the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA).  As California leads the pack of states in terms of privacy and technology laws, other states have followed suit, including Nevada.

The Nevada statute (SB 220) is an amendment to Nevada’s existing law, which requires website operators to have a privacy policy with certain disclosures.
Continue Reading From the Golden State to the Silver State – Privacy Law in Nevada

As part of our blog, from time to time we will share some of the most frequently asked questions that we receive from organizations across different industries regarding data privacy and security, and more specifically GDPR and CCPA. This is the first FAQ in our series.

What’s the Deal with the Data Protection Officer?

Not to be confused with a CPO (Chief Privacy Officer) or EU Representative, the role of data protection officer (DPO) has specific legal meaning under the GDPR. The primary role of a DPO is to ensure that the organization to which it is appointed processes the personal data of its staff, customers or any other individuals (i.e., data subjects) in accordance with applicable data protection rules. Many, but not all organizations subject to GDPR, are required to appoint a DPO, but given the unique nature of the DPO, the why, when and how of this topic is definitely at the top of our US clients’ FAQs.
Continue Reading Privacy FAQ #1