Managing AI privacy concerns in an organization requires expanding existing frameworks but also increasing collaboration across the business in acknowledgment of AI's wide potential to touch many areas, panelists said during an IAPP webinar on Tuesday.
As some regulators expand their focus on protecting children online to include teens, industry is complying with new laws while seeking workarounds and/or challenging regulation in courts, panelists said during a Morrison Foerster webinar Monday. The struggle will continue for a while, they added.
The New York Child Data Protection Act (NYCDPA), which took effect Friday, is unique for many reasons, including its age-flag requirement and because New York lacks a comprehensive law covering users of all ages, experts said in interviews. However, like a good deal of privacy and online safety regulations, it may face legal challenges, said Jason Oliveri, data privacy partner at Hinshaw & Culbertson.
In a decision with nationwide implications, the U.S. District Court for Northern Texas on Wednesday vacated a majority of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act's (HIPAA) Privacy Rule to Support Reproductive Health Care Privacy. A U.S. Department of Health and Human Services motion to dismiss the suit, case 24-00228, was also denied.
A district court preliminarily enjoined a Mississippi social media age-verification law for the second time Wednesday, ruling it's too broad to survive a First Amendment challenge. The U.S. District Court for Southern Mississippi previously enjoined the same law, HB-1126, in July 2024 (see 2407010062).
The New Jersey Supreme Court upheld Daniel’s Law in a decision Tuesday, rejecting a journalist’s First Amendment challenge to the statute that aims to protect certain public officials' personal information.
Objections to the proposed sale of genetic data in the 23andMe bankruptcy case continued piling up in court this week. They came from a range of affected parties, including states and customers of the biotechnology company.
Risk assessments and other preemptive analyses of AI and privacy systems are the best ways of negating harms before they arise, said panelists during an Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) event Monday about California’s proposed AI and privacy regulations.
Enacting a federally imposed 10-year moratorium on enforcing state-level AI laws (see 2506120083) wouldn't necessarily end the debate about the benefits and problems of regulation, panelists indicated during a Cato Institute event Thursday. While they agreed a bevy of state laws would blunt AI innovation and prompt legal challenges, their views varied about how best to protect citizens from potential AI harms, including privacy risks, and still stimulate innovation. In the end, even Congress' moratorium won't end confusion over AI regulation, one panelist said.
While immigrants seem to be the current target of mass-data collection, the federal government's collection of massive amounts of personal information has implications for other populations, including those who speak out against Washington, panelists said during a webinar Wednesday hosted by the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) and the Leadership Conference’s Center for Civil Rights & Technology.