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

Hosted by the University of Colorado Law School, U.S. Data, Privacy, and Cybersecurity Practice Co-Chair David Zetoony will present on his new book, “The Desk Reference Companion to the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) and the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA).” This reference guide collects over 500 of the most common questions concerning

The Colorado Privacy Act, which is scheduled to go into effect in 2023, states that a consumer “has the right to opt out of the processing of personal data” for the purposes of “targeted advertising.”1 Unlike other state statutes, such as the CPRA, the Colorado Privacy Act does not contain an exemption for situations

The California Privacy Rights Act, which is scheduled to go into effect in 2023, states that if a company “shares” personal information with a third party that is engaged in cross-context behavioral advertising, the company must provide the consumer with the ability to “opt-out” of the sharing.1 Furthermore, under the CPRA a business must

The California Privacy Protection Agency (the “Agency” or CPPA), the new California state agency created under the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 (CPRA) to oversee and enforce the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) and the CPRA, has recently called for preliminary public comments on a proposed rulemaking under the CPRA. See the invitation from

Please join Greenberg Traurig U.S. Data, Privacy & Cybersecurity Practice Co-Chair David Zetoony and Food, Beverage & Agribusiness Practice Co-Chair Justin Prochnow for a discussion on current U.S. privacy laws impacting the food and beverage industries (CCPA), upcoming legal changes (CPRA/VCPDA), and emerging industry standards. The webinar will take place on Wednesday, Sept. 22 from

In most contexts, employees should have a low expectation of privacy in the workplace. Their computers, desks, and other common areas may be subject to strict company control and their conduct subject to workplace policies. But as we will discuss in an upcoming two-part series on The Performance Review (Greenberg Traurig’s California Labor and Employment

Some privacy statutes explicitly reference “sensitive” or “special” categories of personal information. While such terms, when used, often include similar data types that are generally considered as raising greater privacy risks to data subjects if disclosed, the exact categories that fall under those rubrics differ between and among statutes. Furthermore, other privacy statutes do not

On Sept. 15, join GT Data, Privacy & Cybersecurity Shareholder David Zetoony and Associate Karin Ross for their myLawCLE presentation, “What Is Considered Sensitive Personal Information?”, co-sponsored with the Federal Bar Association.

The term “sensitive personal information” is often referred to in contracts, regulatory guidance, and policy documents. What constitutes sensitive personal information,

The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLBA) and its implementing regulations impose privacy requirements when financial institutions collect “nonpublic personal information about individuals who obtain financial products or services primarily for personal, family, or household purposes.”[1] GLBA does not apply, however, when a financial institution collects information about individuals “who obtain financial products or services for business,