PAC-5010

Ryle, P. M., Bueltel, B. L., McKnight, M. A., & Beckman, J. K. (2021). Decoding lessons from the Facebook consent decree: Does Sarbanes–Oxley foreshadow the future of privacy regulation? International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41310-021-00124-2

This paper delves into the practical application of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 in aiding privacy policy development and providing guidance for privacy regulation. The research suggests that both the FTC/Facebook Court Order and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act should be regarded as minimum standards for American privacy policy, advocating for CEO certifications, effective internal controls, compliance reviews, and regulatory oversight.

Larose, C. (2022, February 21). Facebook to pay $90 million to settle data privacy lawsuit. Mondaq Business Briefing. Retrieved from https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=sso&db=edsinc&AN=edsinc.A694435928&site=eds-live&scope=site&custid=natuniv

This article provides a real-life case study that illustrates the potential legal and financial consequences for companies that violate users' privacy rights. As such, it can be a valuable resource for students taking a privacy law and data protection course, as it highlights the importance of complying with relevant laws and keeping abreast of legal developments in this field.

Koontz, L. D. (2000). Internet privacy: Comparison of federal agency practices with FTC’s fair information principles: AIMD-00-296R. GAO Reports, 1. Retrieved from https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=sso&db=bth&AN=18210474&site=eds-live&scope=site&custid=natuniv

In today's digital age, protecting personal information is of utmost importance. As seen in a congressional report, even federal websites struggle to fully implement fair information principles, highlighting the need for individuals and organizations alike to understand and comply with privacy laws and data protection regulations.

Hans, G. S. (2012). Privacy Policies, Terms of Service, and FTC Enforcement: Broadening Unfairness Regulation for a New Era. Michigan Telecommunications and Technology Law Review, 19(1), 163–iv. Retrieved from https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=sso&db=edshol&AN=edshol.hein.journals.mttlr19.9&site=eds-live&scope=site&custid=natuniv

This text examines the complex relationship between data collection, privacy policies, and the role of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in regulating unfair and deceptive practices in e-commerce. While collecting user data can offer social benefits, this practice raises concerns about privacy, data monetization, and consumer protection. Through an analysis of prominent websites like Google, Facebook, and Twitter, this text argues that the FTC must use its regulatory authority to protect consumers and reformulate its policy choices concerning unfairness and deception.

O’Connor, E. O. (2018). Protecting consumer data privacy with arbitration. North Carolina Law Review, 96(3), 711–750. Retrieved from https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=sso&db=edshol&AN=edshol.hein.journals.nclr96.23&site=eds-live&scope=site&custid=natuniv

read this article to gain an understanding of the current debate surrounding consumer data privacy legislation in Congress and the different mechanisms that privacy advocates have turned to police consumer data uses. It discusses the legal mechanisms that are currently being used to address privacy harms and the arguments of both privacy advocates and pro-business advocates for and against stringent privacy protections.

Gikay, A. A. (2021). The American way-Until machine learning algorithm beats the law? Journal of Law, Technology & the Internet, 12(1), i-56. Retrieved from https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=sso&db=a9h&AN=152915392&site=eds-live&scope=site&custid=natuniv

This article delves into the topic of algorithmic consumer credit scoring and its regulation in the European Union and the United States. Despite the implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the EU-US Privacy Shield (PS) Framework, there are still concerns regarding the protection of consumers in both jurisdictions, particularly with regards to the use of automated decision-making (ADM) and the increasing sophistication of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The article argues that while the GDPR has provisions tailored to ADM, consumers are similarly protected in both the EU and the US, and that future regulation should primarily adopt a risk-based approach to AI.

Solove, D. J., & Hartzog, W. (2014). The FTC and the new common law of privacy. Columbia Law Review, 114(3), 583–676. Retrieved from https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=sso&db=bth&AN=95640472&site=eds-live&scope=site&custid=natuniv

This article argues that the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) privacy jurisprudence, which enforces companies' privacy policies through its authority to police unfair and deceptive trade practices, has become the most influential regulating force on information privacy in the United States. Despite being criticized as thin, a deeper examination of the principles that emerge from FTC privacy "common law" reveals that it is quite thick, with codified norms, best practices, and baseline privacy protections. The article contends that this "common law" could be developed into a robust privacy regulatory regime that extends far beyond privacy policies and involves a full suite of substantive rules.

FTC Press Release (2017, August 15). Uber settles FTC allegations that it made deceptive privacy and data security claims: Company failed to monitor access to, and provide reasonable security for, consumer data. Retrieved from https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2017/08/uber-settles-ftc-allegations-it-made-deceptive-privacy-data-security-claims

In August 2017, Uber Technologies, Inc. settled Federal Trade Commission (FTC) charges that it deceived consumers by failing to monitor employee access to consumer personal information and by failing to reasonably secure sensitive consumer data stored in the cloud. The FTC alleged that the ride-sharing company failed to live up to its claims that it closely monitored employee access to consumer and driver data and that it deployed reasonable measures to secure personal information it stored on a third-party cloud provider’s servers.

FTCA. Federal Trade Commission Act – Section 5: Unfair or deceptive acts or practices. Retrieved from https://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/supmanual/cch/ftca.pdf.
This article describes the “unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce” enforcement power. Visit the website: https://www.ftc.gov/