CA Prop 24 Places Online Privacy In The Hands Of Web Users

CALIFORNIA — Proposition 24 passed Wednesday, with 56 percent of voters in favor of expanding consumer privacy laws. The new legislation will place safety of personal information in the hands of Californians using the internet.

The new proposition, which passed Wednesday afternoon according to the Associated Press, closes several loopholes for big tech companies and aims to make it easier on internet users to opt out of handing over their personal data to online businesses, social media platforms and e-commerce websites alike.

Prop. 24, otherwise known as the California Privacy Rights Act, has placed the Golden State a few steps ahead other states in terms of data privacy legislation. The proposition adds to the California Consumer Privacy Act, an existing law that went into effect Jan. 1.

Companies and website operators will have some work to do if they weren't already equipped for making privacy options apparent to users, but those who were already prepared will be at an advantage, according to Karen Schuler, who leads global advisory and accounting firm BDO's Governance practice. In layman's terms, she provides support for data privacy compliance.

According to Schuler, the onset of the pandemic heightened the awareness of a need for more privacy protections with more people working at home on their personal computers than ever.

"A lot of the tech companies do as much as they can do from a privacy perspective, I think a little bit is on the end onus of the user and understanding their rights," Schuler told Patch. "But also it is on the tech company to make it easy for people."

"If you're on an app...it should not be difficult to determine 'where's the privacy policy?'" Schuler said. "And once you get to the privacy policy, it should not be difficult to say 'hey, I'd like to correct my information or I'd like to delete it...and being able to exercise those rights in a timely manner.'"

Schuler says tech companies could struggle with this for a while as they transition their platforms and interface formats to fit these regulations.

Another area where problems could arise, Schuler said, is if some companies scramble to meet the requirements of the new legislation and therefore offer public facing privacy notices that the company isn't necessarily able to carry out.

"If [companies] are able to say...'hey we're going to be transparent about this and they're actually doing that, then that's a win-win," Schuler said. "It's a win for the consumer, it's a win for the company and there will be no argument if there is a complaint against them."

One of the biggest criticisms of the law was that it would put the burden consumers to ask companies not to use or sell their data. Opponents wanted companies and websites to have to ask users for permission to sell their personal data.

“Overall, it’s a step backward,” Jacob Snow, an attorney who specializes in tech policy for the ACLU, told CalMatters. “It would undermine privacy protections for Californians.”

Snow also objected to the way in which the existing law allows companies to charge customers more if they don’t allow their personal data to be used. Proposition 24 would make it worse, he said, by allowing companies to use loyalty programs to induce people to permit their personal data to be used.

“That has disproportionate effects on communities in California who are already vulnerable, like Black and Latinx families and elderly people,” Snow told CalMatters. “And those are the people who should be at the center of our thought process, and our concern when we are writing privacy laws.”

Schuler said that while this could be an issue, most big tech companies will know which demographic they are targeting and how to better communicate with them.

For those who could potentially abuse this power, the ballot measure has created a safeguard for that by assembling a state agency to enforce the law. This expands the enforcement power that was once limited to the attorney generals office. Such changes would go into effect in 2023, according to the Los Angeles Times.

"We are at the beginning of a journey that will profoundly shape the fabric of our society by redefining who is in control of our most personal information and putting consumers back in charge of their own data,” said Alastair Mactaggart, chair of Californians for Consumer Privacy and Proposition 24 sponsor, in a statement, according to the Los Angeles Times.

Mactaggart, founder of CCPA, has put up millions of dollars of out of his own wallet to get the proposition passed.

Proposition 24 united disparate groups such as the California Republican Party, the ACLU, the Council on Islamic American Relations and the Medial Alliance. The proposition, which seeks to expand consumer privacy laws, but the very consumer advocates that championed the state’s existing data privacy laws couldn't agree on whether this measure was the right way to go about it.

If it passes Prop 24 would allow consumers to prevent businesses from sharing their personal information, establish a California Privacy Protection Agency to enforce consumer privacy laws, prohibit businesses from retaining customers’ personal information for longer than necessary, increase fines for misusing the personal information of children, and establish penalties for consumer login theft.

Supporters contended the measure strengthens the state’s existing consumer privacy laws and serves as a national model for consumer data protection. Opponents contended that it contains too many concessions to Big Tech, providing consumers with a false sense of data security, while actually undermining it. The measure would allow companies to access Californians’ personal data from their devices as soon as they leave the state.

Check Out The CalMatters 2020 Election Guide

“The real winners with Proposition 24 are the biggest social media platforms, giant tech companies and credit reporting corporations who get more freedom to invade the privacy of workers and consumers, and to continue sharing your credit data. Here's what they won't tell you about the 52 pages of fine print: Proposition 24 asks you to approve an Internet 'pay for privacy' scheme,” the official ballot measure argument against reads. “Those who don't pay more could get inferior service—bad connections, slower downloads and more pop up ads. It's an electronic version of freeway express lanes for the wealthy and traffic jams for everyone else.”

The measure’s supporters included Consumer Watchdog, California NAACP State Conference, State Senator Robert Hertzberg and former Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang.

Yang said the ‘pay for privacy' aspect of the measure would actually empower consumers.

“Californians could get paid for their data from businesses they like and at the same time, get privacy from those they do not,” he wrote in the San Francisco Chronicle.

The measure strengthens one of the most forceful consumer privacy laws in the nation, contended Prop 24 supporters.

“Under Prop 24, a consumer can limit the use of their sensitive information to stop Uber from profiling them based on race, stop Spotify from utilizing their precise geo-location and prevent Facebook from using their sexual orientation, health status or religion in its algorithms,” Consumer Watchdog’s Executive Director Carmen Balber said in endorsing the measure. “In addition, Californians won’t have to worry about the legislature repealing key privacy rights, will have stronger rights to personally enforce privacy laws and will have the protection of a well-staffed and funded European-style privacy commission to protect their rights.”

The bulk of the spending for this measure — more than $5 million — has come from the Yes on 24 campaign, which is entirely funded by Bay Area real estate developer Alastair Mactaggart.

Patch Editor Paige Austin Contributed to this report.