Thread by @jdp23

Up early today to head down to Olympia for the hearing on #SB6281, the (very bad) Washington Privacy Act. Hopefully, I'll be live-tweeting on this thread.

Here's a chart from @ACLU_WA highlighting just some of the problems with SB6281.

@ACLU_WA And if you're in Washington State, please let ask your legislators to OPPOSE SB6281 in its current form.

@SEAindivisible has an action item up, with a ample script and instructions on how to contact your legislators, at facebook.com/SeattleIndivis…

@ACLU_WA @SEAindivisible Here's a fact sheet on #SB6281 from @ACLU_WA @ConsumerFed @EPICprivacy @EFF and @PrivacyToday with a deeper dive into the bill's many problems.

https://twitter.com/jennifer_e_lee/status/1230566920501387264

@ACLU_WA @SEAindivisible @ConsumerFed @EPICprivacy @EFF @PrivacyToday I believe the hearing will be livestreamed, and I think the link will be available at app.leg.wa.gov/committeesched…

Stay tuned!

@ACLU_WA @SEAindivisible @ConsumerFed @EPICprivacy @EFF @PrivacyToday And we're off! The room is packed, and there's overflow seating.

Beginning with a quick briefing discussing some differences between #SB6281 and HB2742 (which came from the ITED committee), available online at app.leg.wa.gov/committeesched…

@ACLU_WA @SEAindivisible @ConsumerFed @EPICprivacy @EFF @PrivacyToday My quick summary of the differences: #SB6281 has a lot more exemptions, narrows the scope of the ITED bill's broad opt-out requirements, and is weaker in many other ways.

That's why I call #SB6281 the "bad" Washington Privacy Act. Don't let the name fool you!

@ACLU_WA @SEAindivisible @ConsumerFed @EPICprivacy @EFF @PrivacyToday @Reuvencarlyle, the bill sponsor, up now: "we're at an important time, there's a dramatic desire for meaningful improvements in consumer privacy legislation"

I agree, and wish we had a bill that would give us real improvements. #SB6281 does not. #waleg

@ACLU_WA @SEAindivisible @ConsumerFed @EPICprivacy @EFF @PrivacyToday @Reuvencarlyle Up next: Stan Shikuma of the Japanese American Citizen's League Seattle. He notes how lack of data security enabled mass incarcerations of Japanese Americans in 1942 -- and #NeverAgainIsNow. He opposes #SB6281.

@ACLU_WA @SEAindivisible @ConsumerFed @EPICprivacy @EFF @PrivacyToday @Reuvencarlyle Now, @larrybehrens, representing @IndivisibleCoup and other Indivisible groups, noting how without a private right of action, citizens can't exercise their civil rights. #SB6281

@ACLU_WA @SEAindivisible @ConsumerFed @EPICprivacy @EFF @PrivacyToday @Reuvencarlyle @larrybehrens @IndivisibleCoup @LivioDeLaCruz, law student and board member of @BLMSeattleKC, also talking about private right of action "we know what it's right to have our rights ignored. We want to have the power in our hands, we want the people to have that power." #SB6281 #waleg #BlackLivesMatter

@ACLU_WA @SEAindivisible @ConsumerFed @EPICprivacy @EFF @PrivacyToday @Reuvencarlyle @larrybehrens @IndivisibleCoup @LivioDeLaCruz @BLMSeattleKC @LivioDeLaCruz notes that we're in an age of income inequality -- and of corruption. What are the legislators doing to protect our rights? #SB6281 #waleg #BlackLivesMatter

@ACLU_WA @SEAindivisible @ConsumerFed @EPICprivacy @EFF @PrivacyToday @Reuvencarlyle @larrybehrens @IndivisibleCoup @LivioDeLaCruz @BLMSeattleKC Somebody from the Washington Hospital Association, speaking in favor. Talks about the bill's "clear and precise" coordination with existing laws; says section 4 is limited to interaction with existing law. #SB6281

@ACLU_WA @SEAindivisible @ConsumerFed @EPICprivacy @EFF @PrivacyToday @Reuvencarlyle @larrybehrens @IndivisibleCoup @LivioDeLaCruz @BLMSeattleKC Someone from the Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs opposes section 17 subsection 10, which requires a warrant for sharing biometric information (including facial recognition), requests a small change in wording. #SB6281

@ACLU_WA @SEAindivisible @ConsumerFed @EPICprivacy @EFF @PrivacyToday @Reuvencarlyle @larrybehrens @IndivisibleCoup @LivioDeLaCruz @BLMSeattleKC Next witness, from an org serving AAPI communities, talks about marginalized communities and facial recognition's biases, requests a moratorium. "History shows this will be abused", cites Japanese internment, over-policing of Black communities, post-9/11 targeting Muslims

@ACLU_WA @SEAindivisible @ConsumerFed @EPICprivacy @EFF @PrivacyToday @Reuvencarlyle @larrybehrens @IndivisibleCoup @LivioDeLaCruz @BLMSeattleKC Policy director of @weareoneamerica also opposes #SB6281. Highlights facial recognition risk, pre-emption of local laws, private right of action, and limits on fines - maximum of $7,500, compared to GDPR's $21,000,000

@ACLU_WA @SEAindivisible @ConsumerFed @EPICprivacy @EFF @PrivacyToday @Reuvencarlyle @larrybehrens @IndivisibleCoup @LivioDeLaCruz @BLMSeattleKC @weareoneamerica I'm on deck, so will miss the next few speakers ... to be continued ...

@ACLU_WA @SEAindivisible @ConsumerFed @EPICprivacy @EFF @PrivacyToday @Reuvencarlyle @larrybehrens @IndivisibleCoup @LivioDeLaCruz @BLMSeattleKC @weareoneamerica @CEOsherpa of @wtia supports #SB6281, talks about balancing small companies' compliance costs with consumer protection. Unsurprisingly they're against private right of action. "AG's office is the expert at enforcement."

Ryan Harkins of Microsoft also supports, suggests #SB6281 has been strengthened since last year. Says the opt-out right goes farther than California's law. And consumers can still sue for conduct that rises to "unfair business practices"

Whew, my testimony went well. I returned to the interaction between the weak facial recognition regulations and non-preemption, talking about the wave of cities around the country banning facial recognition ... like SF. #SB6281 would prevent that from happening in Washington.

Here's a great article by @veenadubal on the SF facial recognition ban. #SB6281 #waleg

theguardian.com/commentisfree/…

@hellrazr followed, noting that she had read an article saying legislators wanted a bill that was the "gold standard" ... but in its present form, #SB6281 is more like "window dressing". Suggests restrictions on secondary uses would be a good thing to add.

and then @jevanhutson , also opposing. Here's his tweet from this morning. #SB6281

https://twitter.com/jevanhutson/status/1230903200716165120

@luke_stark were your ears burning? I analogized facial recognition to plutonium :) #SB6281

xrds.acm.org/article.cfm?ai…

@luke_stark There have been some great questions from the committee at the #SB6281 hearing, both on some big-picture issues and on some specifics. Very impressive performance.

Plus we made @SlatterVandana happy. Bellevue represents!!!!!

@luke_stark @jennifer_e_lee from @ACLU_WA opposes, challenges legislators to get outside of their comfort zones. Talks about feedback from immigrant communities, people of color, LGBTQ+ people all opposing the bill. #SB6281

@luke_stark @jennifer_e_lee @ACLU_WA Maureen Mahoney of @ConsumerReports: haven't taken a position on #SB6281, support the goals, but urges the committee to add stronger protections that were in the House version (for example, strong clauses about de-identified data).

@luke_stark @jennifer_e_lee @ACLU_WA @ConsumerReports A topic that's come up a couple of times (most recently in a question @jennifer_e_lee) is that #SB6281 would pre-empt the City of Seattle's Broadband privacy law. Here's a TechCrunch article from 2017 when it was passed.

techcrunch.com/2017/05/04/who…

@luke_stark @jennifer_e_lee @ACLU_WA @ConsumerReports Some excellent points from somebody whose name and affiliation I missed, highlighting the surveillance of teenagers - again, protections in the House bill that are not in the current draft of #SB6281.

@luke_stark @jennifer_e_lee @ACLU_WA @ConsumerReports Somebody from the state AG's office saying "we cannot enforce #SB6281 as currently written". needs to include langauge to make any violation of the law a "per se CPA violation." Also, broad exceptions that would let industry sidestep regulations.

@luke_stark @jennifer_e_lee @ACLU_WA @ConsumerReports State AG's office notes concerns about facial recognition, effect on marginalized communities, and suggests it should be a separate bill.

Another clause in #SB6281 is a "recipe for profiling".

And there needs to be a private right of action.

@luke_stark @jennifer_e_lee @ACLU_WA @ConsumerReports Larry Shannon from the Washington State Association for Justice also discusses the importance of the private right of action. #SB6281 moves towards creating important rights and protections for consumers; but there is no right without a remedy.

@luke_stark @jennifer_e_lee @ACLU_WA @ConsumerReports Rep. Smith talks about a letter from national advertising companies saying private right of action is divorced from any consumer harms (or something like that).

AG's office notes that private right of action would have to show harm. Again discusses why it's valuable. #SB6281

@luke_stark @jennifer_e_lee @ACLU_WA @ConsumerReports AG's office: "absent an explicit per se clause, unclear whether we can use our CPA authority to investigate the violation" If they suspect a violation, might have to file a lawsuit and go through discovery; a civil demand (under CPA authority) might well be challenged #SB6281

@luke_stark @jennifer_e_lee @ACLU_WA @ConsumerReports Washington Bankers Association: lens is can we comply with federal law as well as state law? They think #SB6281 does provide a balance by laying on top of federal law.

@luke_stark @jennifer_e_lee @ACLU_WA @ConsumerReports Washington Food Industry Association wants to see some clarification. They have a mix of stores; some have loyalty programs that keep data, use third-parties. Does definition of "100,000 consumers" include all consumers, or only the ones whose data is stored? #SB6281

@luke_stark @jennifer_e_lee @ACLU_WA @ConsumerReports Association of National Advertisers opposes a private right of action. WHAT A SURPRISE!!!! And charities advertise too! THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!!

Also they want an exemption for targeted advertising, or something like that #SB6281

@luke_stark @jennifer_e_lee @ACLU_WA @ConsumerReports And guess what, the @NAI agrees with @ANAGovRel. Oh no, legislation could potentially be harmful to the targeted advertising industry!!!!!!!!! #SB6281

@luke_stark @jennifer_e_lee @ACLU_WA @ConsumerReports @NAI @ANAGovRel Somebody from a security industry association points out some inconsistencies in exceptions, argues that "suspicion of criminal activity" is *too narrow* an exception. Concerned that the bill as written would have a chilling effect on adoption of facial recognition #SB6281

@luke_stark @jennifer_e_lee @ACLU_WA @ConsumerReports @NAI @ANAGovRel Somebody from @American_Heart discusses compliance costs, and private right of action could also be costly. Notes that CCPA has an exemption for non-profits. #SB6281

@luke_stark @jennifer_e_lee @ACLU_WA @ConsumerReports @NAI @ANAGovRel @American_Heart Concern about private right of action also coming from journalism perspective. Even more important, reporters currently enjoy a shield law, want to have this bill linked. #SB6281

@luke_stark @jennifer_e_lee @ACLU_WA @ConsumerReports @NAI @ANAGovRel @American_Heart Another great question, from Rep Entenman, on the distinction between "selling data" and "monetizing data". #SB6281

@luke_stark @jennifer_e_lee @ACLU_WA @ConsumerReports @NAI @ANAGovRel @American_Heart Rep Norma Smith reading into the record the letter from @ConsumerFed, @EFF, @EPICPrivacy, @PrivacyToday - I believe this is the cover letter for the #SB6281 fact sheet @jennifer_e_lee tweeted at

https://twitter.com/jennifer_e_lee/status/1230566920501387264

@luke_stark @jennifer_e_lee @ACLU_WA @ConsumerReports @NAI @ANAGovRel @American_Heart @ConsumerFed @EFF @EPICprivacy @PrivacyToday And that's it. Great session!

Oh dear it looks like I broke the threading here. It continues in

https://twitter.com/jdp23/status/1230938907941822464

@luke_stark @jennifer_e_lee @ACLU_WA @ConsumerReports @NAI @ANAGovRel @American_Heart @ConsumerFed @EFF @EPICprivacy @PrivacyToday Tidying up a little ... I missed a couple of names and affiliation, so want to highlight Derek Lum of @interim_cda, who I quoted in

https://twitter.com/jdp23/status/1230925731657469952

@luke_stark @jennifer_e_lee @ACLU_WA @ConsumerReports @NAI @ANAGovRel @American_Heart @ConsumerFed @EFF @EPICprivacy @PrivacyToday @interim_cda And it was @joejerome with the excellent points about teenagers and surveillance. Here's Joseph's thread about the #SB281 #waleg hearing:

https://twitter.com/joejerome/status/1230906576061394944

@luke_stark @jennifer_e_lee @ACLU_WA @ConsumerReports @NAI @ANAGovRel @American_Heart @ConsumerFed @EFF @EPICprivacy @PrivacyToday @interim_cda @joejerome And the @SEAindivisible I used for the #SB6281 action at the beginning doesn't seem to work for a lot of people. I hate software. Here's the version from my own Facebook profile.

facebook.com/photo.php?fbid…

@luke_stark @jennifer_e_lee @ACLU_WA @ConsumerReports @NAI @ANAGovRel @American_Heart @ConsumerFed @EFF @EPICprivacy @PrivacyToday @interim_cda @joejerome @SEAindivisible Finally, there are legislative town halls all around Washington. Please, go to one and ask your reps to OPPOSE SB6281 in its current form.

Take Action Network has a list of town halls at takeaction.network/xactions?shara…

@luke_stark @jennifer_e_lee @ACLU_WA @ConsumerReports @NAI @ANAGovRel @American_Heart @ConsumerFed @EFF @EPICprivacy @PrivacyToday @interim_cda @joejerome @SEAindivisible And with that ... @threadreaderapp unroll