December 2013

Federal Trade Commission
March 19, 2014
10 a.m. to noon
http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2013/12/springprivacy.shtm

Many data brokers offer companies scores to predict trends and the behavior of their customers. Companies are using predictive scores for a variety of purposes, ranging from identity verification and fraud prevention to marketing and advertising.

For example, companies are using scores to predict the likelihood that a person has committed identity fraud; the likelihood that a certain transaction will result in fraud; the credit risk associated with certain mortgage loan applications; whether contacting a consumer by mail or phone will lead to successful debt collection; whether sending a catalog to a certain address will result in an in-store or online purchase; the likelihood that an individual is taking his or her medication; a person’s presence on the Internet and his or her influence over others; or whether a customer is pregnant, and if so, when the baby is due.

According to media reports, these scores are determining whether transactions trigger further scrutiny, the kind of special offers that companies make to certain individuals (and those they don’t), and even whether the customer should speak to a high-ranking customer service agent at a company.

Consumers are largely unaware of these scores, and have little to no access to the underlying data that comprises the scores. As a result, these predictive scores raise a variety of potential privacy concerns and questions. The panel will discuss questions such as:

  • What are the current types of predictive scores available to companies and what scores can we expect data brokers to offer in the future?
  • How are companies utilizing these predictive scores?
  • How accurate are these scores and the underlying data used to create them?
  • How can consumers benefit from the availability and use of these scores?
  • What are the privacy concerns surrounding the use of predictive scoring?
  • What legal protections currently exist for consumers regarding the use of predictive scoring, both in the United States and internationally?
  • What consumer protections should be provided; for example, should consumers have access to these scores and the underlying data used to create them? Should some of these scores be considered eligibility determinations that should be scrutinized under the Fair Credit Reporting Act?


Federal Trade Commission
Feb. 19, 2014
10 a.m. to noon
http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2013/12/springprivacy.shtm

Recently, retailers and other businesses have begun tracking consumers’ movements throughout and around retail stores and other attractions using technologies that identify signals emitted by their mobile devices. While the technologies differ, many work by identifying and collecting the MAC address – which is unique to a particular device – broadcast when a mobile device searches for Wi-Fi networks. Companies can use these technologies to reveal information about consumers including the path taken throughout a location, length of time in one location, whether a visitor is new or returning, and the frequency of visits to a location. According to media reports, major retailers in the United States are using or have tested the technology in their stores in order to gain insights into the behavior of their customers.

In most cases, this tracking is invisible to consumers and occurs with no consumer interaction. As a result, the use of these technologies raises a number of potential privacy concerns and questions. The seminar will address questions such as:

  • What different types of mobile device tracking are companies currently implementing, how do they work, and where are they used?
  • What are potential future uses of these technologies?
  • What are the similarities or differences between mobile device tracking and online tracking technologies?
  • What types of information and benefits do retailers gain from these technologies?
  • What benefits do consumers derive from these technologies?
  • What are the privacy and security risks associated with these technologies?
  • How are companies addressing these risks?
  • What information and choices are provided to consumers about this type of tracking?
  • How anonymous is the tracking?
  • How can companies implement the principles of privacy by design, simplified consumer choice, and increased transparency when designing and using these technologies?


In First Major Speech, FCC Chairman Wheeler Articulates a Regulatory Philosophy

In the first of a series of remarks over the next several months, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler began to articulate a regulatory philosophy relating to how we are living in a time of revolutionary technological change and the role of the FCC in tackling the challenges and seizing the opportunities created by the new network that has engulfed us.

The FCC is the public’s representative to the ongoing network revolution. The agency was created originally in 1934 to oversee the third-generation networks of telephony and broadcast and, eventually cable and wireless carriers. Specifically, Congress charged the FCC to protect -- quote -- “the public interest, convenience, and necessity” of the nation’s networks. In serving the public interest, the FCC has focused on dual responsibilities. First, facilitating dynamic technological change to ensure the U.S. has world-class communications networks. Second, ensuring that our networks reflect our civic values, most notably our belief that communications networks should be accessible to all. As our networks evolve, so should government oversight.

There are some who suggest that new technology should essentially free the new networks from regulation; that market forces are enough to ensure that the public interest will be served. I am a rabid believer in the power of the marketplace. But I have seen enough about how markets operate to know that they don’t always, by themselves, solve every problem. Our new networks are even more important to society than were the old ones. The public has the right to be represented as we go through the transition. The evolution of network technology changes neither the responsibility of networks to the greater society, nor the FCC’s mission to protect the public interest. Congress gave the FCC authority over interstate and foreign wire and radio communications. We have an obligation to live up to that mandate. Indeed, the success of the Internet would be imperiled were that not the case. Assuring that the Internet exists, however, as a collection of open, interconnected entities is an appropriate activity for the people’s representatives. As we fulfill our responsibility, we will be guided by two lodestars: competition policy and something Chairman Wheeler calls the Network Compact. You can think of this as the basic rights of consumers and the basic responsibilities of network operators. There are three key elements of the Network Compact -- accessibility, interconnection, and public safety and security.

Deutsche Telekom plans new packages after Internet cap blocked

Deutsche Telekom plans to repackage its Internet offering rather than appeal against an October court ruling that blocked it from capping connection speeds when customers exceed data limits on flat-rate contracts.

After announcing its decision not to launch an appeal, the former German monopoly said that it will introduce new deals with flat rates or fixed data volumes. DT’s head of German operations, Niek Jan van Damme, told reporters that the company aims to be more transparent, adding: "We want to win back customer confidence we have lost." Deutsche Telekom's Van Damme declined to indicate how much customers will have to pay for the new packages, but he said that the new flat-rate packages would be more expensive than the contracts with fixed data volumes.

Digital Cities Benefit from Broadband Investments

National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) congratulates the winners of the 2013 Digital Cities awards, which recognize cities for the innovative use of technology to expand access to government services, promote citizen engagement, increase transparency, reduce costs and improve the lives of residents.

The Center for Digital Government, a research and advisory firm focused on technology in state and local government, gave out the awards at the National League of Cities annual conference in Seattle in November 2013. NTIA is particularly pleased to note that a number of winning cities were lauded for projects and activities funded by our Broadband Technology Opportunities Program (BTOP). Boston, which received two separate BTOP grants, took first-place honors in the Digital Cities “large population” category. The Digital Cities survey specifically recognized a BTOP-funded program in Boston called Technology Goes Home, which provides digital literacy training, subsidized netbooks and low-cost Internet access to low-income middle and high school students. Another big city that made the Digital Cities list was Chicago. Chicago used BTOP funds to install or upgrade more than 3,000 computers and offer digital literacy training at over 150 locations, including libraries, community colleges, public housing sites, workforce centers and senior centers.

FTC announces privacy issues for 2014

The Federal Trade Commission announced three consumer privacy issues that it plans to examine in 2014. The FTC will hold three events in 2014 that focus on mobile tracking, consumer online scoring and user-generated health data in 2014.

The first seminar -- scheduled to take place on Feb. 19, 2013 -- will examine technology that allows businesses to track patrons through their mobile devices. This kind of technology “raises a number of potential privacy concerns,” especially when users doesn’t know their mobile devices are being tracked, the FTC wrote. The second event -- to be held on March 19 -- will look at how companies that collect data about user online activity use that data to score those users and then tailor their online experience them according to their scores. “These scores are determining whether transactions trigger further scrutiny, the kind of special offers that companies make to certain individuals (and those they don’t), and even whether the customer should speak to a high-ranking customer service agent at a company,” the FTC wrote. A third event, which has not yet been scheduled, will examine health data that a consumer provides voluntarily and then controls.

French court tells Google and local ISPs to block copyright-infringing video sites

It seems copyright-related site-blocking is becoming more popular in Europe. In the latest example, a French court has ordered not only local internet service providers but also Google and other search engines to pretend that 16 video-streaming sites don’t exist.

The Paris High Court ruled that Google, Microsoft and Yahoo must all remove links to services such as dpstream and Fifostream, which carry copyright-infringing material, from their results (or “did carry” -- it looks like Fifostream has actually shut down now). ISPs including Orange and Bouygues Telecom must block access to the services, too. This sort of thing is fast becoming the norm in Europe. Countries such as Denmark started forcing blocks on The Pirate Bay back in 2008, but the rights-holders’ anti-infringement crusade really picked up steam with the British Newzbin ruling in 2011. Europe’s top legal advisor said that such blocks are legitimate, as long as they are targeted and there’s no mass monitoring going on to support them.

The NSA wrote turkey-day talking points, because of course it did

Thanksgiving can be a touchy time for families with divergent politics. If not Obamacare, it's a good bet that somebody, somewhere was facing off with an aunt or uncle about the National Security Agency. Defenders of the spy agency might have found this set of talking points helpful. Distributed internally by the NSA the week before Thanksgiving and reported earlier by Firedoglake, the two-pager -- a literal set of bullet points -- armed employees with verbal ammunition that they were encouraged to share "with family and close friends."

Accused of Cyberspying, Huawei Is ‘Exiting the U.S. Market’

The CEO of the world's biggest telecommunications equipment maker, which for years has been labeled by US officials as a proxy for Chinese military and intelligence agencies, says he's giving up on America. Ren Zhengfei, the 69-year-old founder and CEO of China-based Huawei, said he would no longer look for business in the United States, in the wake of accusations from lawmakers and government officials that the company is a de facto arm of the Chinese authorities.

"If Huawei gets in the middle of U.S-China relations," and causes problems, "it's not worth it," Ren reportedly said. "Therefore, we have decided to exit the U.S. market, and not stay in the middle." It wasn't immediately clear what Ren meant by "exit" the market, but for the company, the US market could easily be described as hostile. Lawmakers have exhorted US firms to stop doing business with Huawei, and federal regulators have tried to block the spread of the company's equipment in the United States. William Plummer, a Huawei vice president and the company's point person in Washington, told Foreign Policy, "It is true that Huawei has adjusted our priority focus to markets that welcome competition and investment, like Europe," adding that Ren is "making a comment on the current market environment." The company's overseas business is thriving. It has offices in 18 countries and has invested billions of dollars building communications networks in Africa.

Why Google's Fair Use Victory In Google Books Suit Is A Big Deal -- And Why It Isn't

[Commentary] On November 14, federal judge Denny Chin rejected a copyright challenge Google’s practices of scanning books into digital format and presenting snippets of those scans in search results because the practices qualify as fair use. It’s an exciting and hard-fought victory for Google, one that took nearly a decade of litigation and many millions of dollars to achieve. Still, this ruling merely preserves the status quo, a related case in 2012 (the HathiTrust case) already found fair use for similar facts, and a Second Circuit ruling earlier in 2013 signaled that Google probably would qualify for a fair use defense. So is this ruling a big deal? Yes and no.

The ruling is a big deal because:

  • It adds to the small body of search engine law.
  • The case rejects concerns about analog-to-digital conversion.
  • Google Books is great.
  • The ruling extends Google’s market leadership.

And why the ruling isn't a big deal:

  • The case will be appealed.
  • Fair use rulings are fact-specific.
  • It’s unlikely the ruling will help anyone other than Google.