California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) vetoed a drone bill Wednesday that would have allowed trespassing charges to be filed against an individual flying drones less than 350 feet above real property without the express permission of the property owner, regardless whether anyone’s privacy was violated. In his veto message to the Senate, Brown said drone technology raises “novel issues that merit careful examination” but said he vetoed SB-142 because, “while well-intentioned,” it “could expose the occasional hobbyist and the FAA-approved commercial user alike to burdensome litigation and new causes of action.” Brown asked the state Senate to look at this issue more carefully. Brown signed a bill proposed by Sen. Anthony Cannella (R), SB-676, that enables easier prosecution of those who engage in cyber exploitation and revenge porn. Meanwhile, California’s Electronic Communications Privacy Act (SB-178) passed the Senate 32-4 Wednesday.

California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) vetoed a drone bill Wednesday that would have allowed trespassing charges to be filed against an individual flying drones less than 350 feet above real property without the express permission of the property owner, regardless whether anyone’s privacy was violated. In his veto message to the Senate, Brown said drone technology raises “novel issues that merit careful examination” but said he vetoed SB-142 because, “while well-intentioned,” it “could expose the occasional hobbyist and the FAA-approved commercial user alike to burdensome litigation and new causes of action.” Brown asked the state Senate to look at this issue more carefully. Brown signed a bill proposed by Sen. Anthony Cannella (R), SB-676, that enables easier prosecution of those who engage in cyber exploitation and revenge porn. Meanwhile, California’s Electronic Communications Privacy Act (SB-178) passed the Senate 32-4 Wednesday.

Drones can be useful tools for many industries, including real estate, insurance and technology, but present significant privacy concerns, particularly in the areas of data retention and public safety, witnesses said during a House Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet Subcommittee hearing Thursday. Representatives questioned witnesses on the privacy practices used by their respective industries when operating drones, and about the ways innovation caused by drone technology should be leveraged with personal privacy.

There has been no evidence the data stolen during the recent Office of Personnel Management data breach has been used yet “in a nefarious way,” meaning the breach can't be classified as a cyberattack, said Director of National Intelligence James Clapper during a House Intelligence Committee hearing Thursday. The OPM breach, revealed in June, has since been found to have exposed the Social Security numbers for 21.5 million people along with other personally identifiable information (see 1507090049). The data appears to have been stolen via “passive intelligence collection activity, just as we do,” Clapper testified. Rep. Chris Stewart, R-Utah, questioned Clapper's assessment of the OPM breach, saying “we don’t really know what has been the effect of this being taken.”

The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation released a report Thursday on the “Privacy Panic Cycle,” named after the phenomenon the report's authors, ITIF IT Vice President Daniel Castro and Research Assistant Alan McQuinn, say occurs when new technologies are introduced. It’s striking how often the same old privacy arguments are brought up when new technology appears, Castro said. Privacy experts who reviewed the report before its release raised some concerns with its findings during an ITIF event Thursday, calling it a road map the government could use to rebut anyone who criticizes its mass surveillance programs.

The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation released a report Thursday on the “Privacy Panic Cycle,” named after the phenomenon the report's authors, ITIF IT Vice President Daniel Castro and Research Assistant Alan McQuinn, say occurs when new technologies are introduced. It’s striking how often the same old privacy arguments are brought up when new technology appears, Castro said. Privacy experts who reviewed the report before its release raised some concerns with its findings during an ITIF event Thursday, calling it a road map the government could use to rebut anyone who criticizes its mass surveillance programs.

There has been no evidence the data stolen during the recent Office of Personnel Management data breach has been used yet “in a nefarious way,” meaning the breach can't be classified as a cyberattack, said Director of National Intelligence James Clapper during a House Intelligence Committee hearing Thursday. The OPM breach, revealed in June, has since been found to have exposed the Social Security numbers for 21.5 million people along with other personally identifiable information (see 1507090049). The data appears to have been stolen via “passive intelligence collection activity, just as we do,” Clapper testified. Rep. Chris Stewart, R-Utah, questioned Clapper's assessment of the OPM breach, saying “we don’t really know what has been the effect of this being taken.”

Drones can be useful tools for many industries, including real estate, insurance and technology, but present significant privacy concerns, particularly in the areas of data retention and public safety, witnesses said during a House Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet Subcommittee hearing Thursday. Representatives questioned witnesses on the privacy practices used by their respective industries when operating drones, and about the ways innovation caused by drone technology should be leveraged with personal privacy.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to review the FCC’s July 10 declaratory ruling clarifying rules for the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (see 1507130039). The Chamber, widely viewed as the nation’s single most powerful trade association, raised concerns about the ruling when it was still being developed at the FCC (see 1506110009). Lawyers who sought changes to the declaratory ruling on behalf of their clients told us before the order was even approved that legal challenges were likely (see 1506160056).

Frontier Communications and Verizon scored a clear-cut victory in the FCC decision Wednesday (see 1509020064) approving without conditions the proposed transfer of Verizon wireline systems in California, Florida and Texas to Frontier. In granting necessary license transfers on Day 174 of its 180-day nonbinding transaction review shot clock, commission bureaus cited Frontier-Verizon arguments as trumping the concerns raised by the deal’s critics, though it did note certain Frontier commitments provided some further assurances -- something competitors welcomed and said they expected to be honored. The FCC also found Frontier was more likely to build out broadband networks in the affected areas than Verizon was.