Chairman Crapo Cites Apparent Consensus on Need for Data Collection Transparency
The Senate Banking Committee’s data privacy hearing Thursday showed a “significant amount of consensus” on the need for platforms to be more transparent about data they collect online, Chairman Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, told us. Legislators appeared to believe this should be “part of any ultimate [legislative] solution,” he said. Ranking member Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, hopes the committee delivers a data privacy bill, telling us Crapo is “very interested.” Brown said to expect interest from the Senate Commerce and Judiciary committees.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
Members debated whether data should be treated as personal property. Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., told us that regardless of where people fall on the property questions, there's agreement on the need for more transparency on what’s being collected, how it’s offered to third parties and what the data is generally worth. More clarity in that regard will help educate consumers on the debate about whether data should be considered personal property, he said.
Warner and Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., introduced legislation in June (see 1906240012) that would require platforms disclose how consumer data is monetized and valued. Some lawmakers and witnesses, including a privacy expert from the American Civil Liberties Union, questioned feasibility and utility of valuing private data.
Determining the worth of data for individual users isn’t entirely feasible, testified DrumWave CEO Michelle Finneran Dennedy, because a single user’s data isn’t worth much without an accompanying data set. The larger the data set, the higher the value of each individual’s data, she said. Valuing data is difficult because raw or personal data sets aren’t in demand, testified American Action Forum Technology and Innovation Policy Director Will Rinehart. Insights built on top of data are what's valuable, he said.
Describing Dennedy as a tech industry spokesperson, Warner told reporters it’s absurd to argue that valuing data is too difficult. It’s complex, but companies are making acquisitions constantly based on the data's worth, he said. Users should at least know what’s being collected and what it’s worth, he said during the hearing: “There’s nothing free about what Facebook or Google are offering.” There’s nothing wrong with that, but there’s too much opaqueness, he said.
Brown went into the hearing without seeing much value in labeling data as personal property. Afterward, he told us he was less convinced of the need to treat data as property. This gained some traction because Americans like the idea of ownership, as with a car, testified ACLU Senior Advocacy and Policy Counsel Chad Marlow. But property rights aren’t necessary for data, he said, noting we have speech and privacy rights, but we don’t own them.
The testimony suggests data property isn’t the correct solution, said Sen. Martha McSally, R-Ariz., but it’s clear that certain tech business models are based on collecting data, so these services aren’t necessarily free. She asked if having better transparency will help lead to better solutions to privacy issues.
One witness in favor of assigning data property rights to consumers was American Bar Association Committee on Cyberspace Law Chairman Jeffrey Ritter. He noted Germany, Japan and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development support legal rules on data ownership. Missing in EU's general data protection regulation are data ownership rights, he said, arguing that lets industry exploit such caches without effective enforcement. If enforcers know who owns the ones and zeros and who breaks the rules, enforcement's more effective, he said.
Consumers enjoy major benefits from offering their information to platforms, said Sens. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., and Pat Toomey, R-Pa. Services with lots of details on their consumers and advertisers can help consumers find the lowest prices. But Congress needs to set clear authorization for how entities can use data and clear penalties for misusing data, Tillis said, urging multi-jurisdictional action.