Skip to content
Photo of David A. Zetoony

David Zetoony, Co-Chair of the firm's U.S. Data, Privacy and Cybersecurity Practice, focuses on helping businesses navigate data privacy and cyber security laws from a practical standpoint. David has helped hundreds of companies establish and maintain ongoing privacy and security programs, and he has defended corporate privacy and security practices in investigations initiated by the Federal Trade Commission, and other data privacy and security regulatory agencies around the world, as well as in class action litigation.

David receives regular recognitions from clients and peers for his knowledge and experience in the fields of data privacy and security. The National Law Journal named him a “Cybersecurity and Data Privacy Trailblazer,” JD Supra recognized him four times as one of the most widely read names when it comes to data privacy, cyber security, or the collection and use of data, and Lexology identified him six times as the top “legal influencer” in the area of technology, media, and telecommunications in the United States, the European Union, and in the context of cross-border transfers of information. He is the author of the American Bar Associations primary publication on the European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and is writing the American Bar Associations primary publication on the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA).

Companies are allowed to transfer personal data outside the European Economic Area (EEA) if they are (1) transferring data to an entity that is within a country that has been recognized by the European Commission as ensuring an adequate level of protection or (2) they have put in place a European Commission-approved mechanism (a “safeguard”)

Companies are allowed to transfer personal data outside the European Economic Area (EEA) if they are (1) transferring data to an entity that is within a country that has been recognized by the European Commission as ensuring an adequate level of protection or (2) they have put in place a European Commission-approved mechanism (a “safeguard”)

No.

Companies are allowed to transfer personal data outside the European Economic Area (EEA) if they are (1) transferring data to an entity that is within a country that has been recognized by the European Commission as ensuring an adequate level of protection or (2) they have put in place a European Commission-approved mechanism (a

Companies are allowed to transfer personal data outside the European Economic Area (EEA) if they are (1) transferring data to an entity within a country recognized by the European Commission as ensuring an adequate level of protection or (2) they have put in place a European Commission-approved mechanism (a “safeguard”) that imposes many of the

No.

Companies are allowed to transfer personal data outside the European Economic Area (EEA) if they are (1) transferring data to an entity within a country recognized by the European Commission as ensuring an adequate level of protection or (2) they have put in place a European Commission-approved mechanism (a “safeguard”) that imposes many of

No.

The GDPR requires that when a “controller or processor … transfer[s] … data to a third country” that is not considered to have data protection laws analogous to those within the European Union, it utilizes an adequacy measures.[1] In situations where an individual within the European Union is initiating the transfer to a

Profiling is defined in several statutes as any form of automated processing of personal data to evaluate, analyze, or predict personal aspects concerning an identified or identifiable individual’s economic situation, health, personal preferences, interests, reliability, behavior, location, or movements.[1] Profiling activities can loosely be grouped into the following three categories or buckets with the

The terms “deidentified” and “deidentification” are commonly used in modern privacy statutes and are functionally exempt from most privacy- and security-related requirements. As indicated in the chart below, differences exist between how the term was defined in the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) and how it was defined in later state privacy statutes set to

It depends.

While most modern data privacy statutes allow individuals to request access to the personal information held by an organization about the individual, they do not confer upon individuals a right to understand how or why a business has made decisions about them. That said, one privacy statute – the California Privacy Rights Act

No.

Modern state privacy statutes in the United States (set to go into effect in 2023) and European privacy regulations adopt a similar definition of “profiling,” which occurs when three elements are met:

  1. An activity must involve “an automated form of processing;”
  2. An activity must be “carried out on personal data;”
  3. The objective of