The House Commerce Committee's top Republican and TechNet raised alarm over an economic analysis of California Consumer Privacy Act costs. But the Berkeley Economic Advising and Research (BEAR) says costs “present a notable, but hardly insurmountable challenge." BEAR prepared the Aug. 15 report for the California attorney general (see 1909200030). Commerce Committee ranking member Greg Walden (R) Wednesday said the study highlighted the need for a federal privacy bill. TechNet Executive Director-California Courtney Jensen said Tuesday this shows CCPA "will not only cost billions for businesses to comply with, but small businesses and start-ups are likely to face higher compliance costs." The report estimated initial compliance costs at about $55 billion, about 1.8 percent of California gross state product in 2018, and estimated direct compliance costs $467 million-$16.5 billion over the next decade. CCPA “will have consistently positive net costs for the state economy, but the magnitude of these costs is negligible from a macroeconomic perspective.” That doesn’t count “considerable” benefits to protected consumers. Firms operating within California may have a competitive disadvantage to those operating only outside the state, but it’s small, the document said. “Previous legislation that was unique to California has in turn set national standards as firms find it easier to adopt California’s requirements to all products and services rather than provide differentiated services.” There’s “likely limited direct competition between firms that would be subject to the regulation and those that would not,” it said. The new law could “provide a future competitive advantage for affected firms that are required to come into CCPA compliance now by creating additional barriers to entry for future competitors considering entering into the California market,” it said. “If the CCPA is a precursor for future privacy regulations at the additional state or federal level, then firms already in compliance with the CCPA will have a competitive advantage.”
A federal privacy law shouldn’t be “less strict” than any existing state law, a National Association of Attorneys General official said Tuesday. Based on Congress’ progress, it doesn’t seem there will be a federal law in effect by January, when the California Consumer Privacy Act takes effect, said NAG Training and Research Institute Center for Consumer Protection program counsel Blake Bee. So industry will need to comply with a patchwork of laws, he told a New America event.
A federal privacy law shouldn’t be “less strict” than any existing state law, a National Association of Attorneys General official said Tuesday. Based on Congress’ progress, it doesn’t seem there will be a federal law in effect by January, when the California Consumer Privacy Act takes effect, said NAG Training and Research Institute Center for Consumer Protection program counsel Blake Bee. So industry will need to comply with a patchwork of laws, he told a New America event.
The FCC has to challenge California and other state net neutrality rules, after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit’s ruling last week, to keep the internet from being shaped by “the lowest common denominator,” said Commissioner Mike O’Rielly on the C-Span’s The Communicators taped hours after the ruling Tuesday. The episode was scheduled to have been shown Saturday. O’Rielly also discussed 5G, media ownership and FCC pre-emption of state and local rules to promote nationwide deployment of broadband infrastructure. “Saying that a particular boundary of a state which may have been decided decades or hundreds of years ago based on geography or some military conflict ... it’s just artificial,” O’Rielly said.
Competitors and consumer advocates in interviews hoped Northwest Fiber’s buy of Frontier Communications wireline, video and long-distance operations in four states will lead to better rural broadband. Oregon and Montana intervenors listed grievances with Frontier. They haven’t formally supported or opposed the acquisitions, with regulatory reviews early on. State and federal review timelines stretch into early next year.
The FCC has to challenge California and other state net neutrality rules, after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit’s ruling last week, to keep the internet from being shaped by “the lowest common denominator,” said Commissioner Mike O’Rielly on the C-Span’s The Communicators taped hours after the ruling Tuesday. The episode was scheduled to have been shown Saturday. O’Rielly also discussed 5G, media ownership and FCC pre-emption of state and local rules to promote nationwide deployment of broadband infrastructure. “Saying that a particular boundary of a state which may have been decided decades or hundreds of years ago based on geography or some military conflict ... it’s just artificial,” O’Rielly said.
Competitors and consumer advocates in interviews hoped Northwest Fiber’s buy of Frontier Communications wireline, video and long-distance operations in four states will lead to better rural broadband. Oregon and Montana intervenors listed grievances with Frontier. They haven’t formally supported or opposed the acquisitions, with regulatory reviews early on. State and federal review timelines stretch into early next year.
MVPDs tacked on fees adding $450 to the average customer’s annual subscription, said a Thursday Consumer Reports analysis of nearly 800 bills from 13 U.S. providers last year.
MVPDs tacked on fees adding $450 to the average customer’s annual subscription, said a Thursday Consumer Reports analysis of nearly 800 bills from 13 U.S. providers last year.
FCC Chairman Ajit Pai is unlikely to rush to address a remand on public safety, an issue remanded for further work by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit Tuesday that largely upheld the FCC 2017 order overturning 2015 net neutrality rules (see 1910010018). Others said Wednesday because the issues involve public safety, the agency may feel compelled to respond (see 1910020028).