Lawyers' Committee Opposes New Draft of American Privacy Rights Act
The Lawyers' Committee opposes the new draft of the American Privacy Rights Act for lacking civil rights protections and AI impact assessments. They stress the need for comprehensive privacy legislation prioritizing civil rights.
Read original article
The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law has expressed opposition to the new draft of the American Privacy Rights Act (APRA) and is urging Members of Congress to vote against it. The current version of APRA is criticized for stripping out civil rights protections and weakening privacy measures. The Committee highlights that the new draft fails to address data-driven discrimination and lacks provisions for AI impact assessments, essential components for safeguarding privacy rights. By removing anti-discrimination protections and other key elements, the draft is seen as inadequate in protecting consumer trust and preventing unfair use of personal data. The Committee emphasizes the importance of including civil rights provisions in privacy legislation to ensure fairness and equity, especially for marginalized communities. The draft is criticized for creating loopholes that could allow tech companies to exploit personal data without adequate safeguards, making it weaker than existing state laws. The Committee calls for a comprehensive privacy bill that prioritizes civil rights to build a more equitable internet environment.
Related
EU Council has withdrawn the vote on Chat Control
The EU Council withdrew the vote on Belgium's Chat Control plan due to lack of support. Critics raised privacy concerns over monitoring chat messages and client-side scanning. Uncertainty looms as discussions resume post-summer.
EU cancels vote on private chat app law amid encryption concerns
The European Union cancels vote on law targeting child sexual abuse material over encryption concerns. Proposed measures involve scanning images on messaging apps, sparking privacy debates among member states. Negotiations ongoing.
OpenAI and Anthropic are ignoring robots.txt
Two AI startups, OpenAI and Anthropic, are reported to be disregarding robots.txt rules, allowing them to scrape web content despite claiming to respect such regulations. TollBit analytics revealed this behavior, raising concerns about data misuse.
Colorado has a first-in-the-nation law for AI – but what will it do?
Colorado enforces pioneering AI regulations for companies starting in 2026. The law mandates disclosure of AI use, data correction rights, and complaint procedures to address bias concerns. Experts debate its enforcement effectiveness and impact on technological progress.
Y Combinator, AI startups oppose California AI safety bill
Y Combinator and 140+ machine-learning startups oppose California Senate Bill 1047 for AI safety, citing innovation hindrance and vague language concerns. Governor Newsom also fears over-regulation impacting tech economy. Debates continue.
5 comments> Passing comprehensive privacy legislation would be a major public good–but APRA no longer can be called comprehensive. Civil rights guardrails are essential for consumer trust in a system that allows companies to collect and use personal data without consent. The new draft strips out anti-discrimination protections, AI impact assessment requirements, and the ability to opt-out of AI decision-making for major economic opportunities like housing and credit. We cannot abide a regime that would perpetuate, in the words of Dr. Ruha Benjamin, a form of ‘Jim Code’: ‘the employment of new technologies that reflect and reproduce existing inequities.’
"the core purpose of privacy: to ensure that who we are cannot be used against us unfairly."
No. Privacy is an end in itself. It is a human right. Falling back to economic justifications weakens the foundation of fighting for privacy.
I'd be interested to see what kind of non-discrimination provision was removed. A rule against discriminating against people for exercising their privacy rights, like we see in the California Consumer Privacy Act, GDPR, &c.? Or a more general, civil rights-style prohibition, perhaps incorporating a list of protected classes?
They mention the new draft could be weaker than state laws it would preempt. I take it that's most likely a reference to California law. But it comes after discussion of a loophole they see for on-device data, not the part of about non-discrimination.
It makes sense for a civil rights organization to want strong nondiscrimination language in a federal privacy bill. But I'm not sure we've seen those bundled in one law and passed before. We have with AI-specific legislation. If the APRA is turning into more of an Omnibus Big Tech Bad Behavior bill, AI regs included, that might make political sense.
I don't know anything about the legislation, but the linked article's main complaint seems to be that anti discrimination language was removed from the bill. Ok. I don't understand all the issues involved with that, or what that language was.
Regardless, is it still good without that? Does it increase our privacy rights? Why not move the needle in the right direction and then lobby for additional things?
Related
EU Council has withdrawn the vote on Chat Control
The EU Council withdrew the vote on Belgium's Chat Control plan due to lack of support. Critics raised privacy concerns over monitoring chat messages and client-side scanning. Uncertainty looms as discussions resume post-summer.
EU cancels vote on private chat app law amid encryption concerns
The European Union cancels vote on law targeting child sexual abuse material over encryption concerns. Proposed measures involve scanning images on messaging apps, sparking privacy debates among member states. Negotiations ongoing.
OpenAI and Anthropic are ignoring robots.txt
Two AI startups, OpenAI and Anthropic, are reported to be disregarding robots.txt rules, allowing them to scrape web content despite claiming to respect such regulations. TollBit analytics revealed this behavior, raising concerns about data misuse.
Colorado has a first-in-the-nation law for AI – but what will it do?
Colorado enforces pioneering AI regulations for companies starting in 2026. The law mandates disclosure of AI use, data correction rights, and complaint procedures to address bias concerns. Experts debate its enforcement effectiveness and impact on technological progress.
Y Combinator, AI startups oppose California AI safety bill
Y Combinator and 140+ machine-learning startups oppose California Senate Bill 1047 for AI safety, citing innovation hindrance and vague language concerns. Governor Newsom also fears over-regulation impacting tech economy. Debates continue.