Some members of the California legislature want their state to remain the leader for data privacy and cybersecurity regulation in the U.S. This includes protections for biometric information, similar to those under the Biometric Information Privacy Act in Illinois, 740 ILCS 14 et seq. (BIPA). State Senator Bob Wieckowski introduced SB 1189 on February 17,
Illinois Panel Issues Important Ruling on BIPA Statute of Limitations
On September 17, 2021, a three-judge panel of the Illinois Appellate Court for the First Judicial District issued a long-awaited decision regarding the statute of limitations for claims under the state’s Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”) in Tims v. Black Horse Carriers, Inc. The Tims decision marks the first appellate guidance regarding this issue. Although
Baltimore Officially Bans Private Use of Facial Recognition Technology
Yesterday, Baltimore’s local ordinance prohibiting persons from “obtaining, retaining, accessing, or using certain face surveillance technology or any information obtained from certain face surveillance technology,” became effective. The new ordinance prohibits the use of facial recognition technology by city residents, businesses, and most of the city government (excluding the city police department) until December 2022.
NYC Creates BIPA-Like Requirements for Retail, Hospitality Businesses Concerning Biometric Information Collected From Customers
Effective July 9, 2021, certain retail and hospitality businesses that collect and use “biometric identifier information” from customers will need to post conspicuous notices near all customer entrances to their facilities. These businesses will also be barred from selling, leasing, trading, sharing or otherwise profiting from the biometric identifier information they collect from customers. Customers
Does the Workers’ Compensation Act Bar BIPA Claims? Illinois Supreme Court Will Weigh In
The Illinois Supreme Court recently agreed to hear an appeal of an Appellate Court’s decision addressing whether an employee’s claim for damages under Illinois’s Biometric Information Protection Act is preempted by the exclusivity provisions of the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Act (“IWCA”). Back in September, the Illinois Appellate Court for the First Judicial District held that
Maryland Joins New York with a BIPA-like Biometric Privacy Bill
On January 13, House Delegate Sara Love Introduced the “Biometric Identifiers and Biometric Information Privacy Act” (the “Act”) substantially modeled after the Biometric Information Privacy Act in Illinois, 740 ILCS 14 et seq. (the “BIPA”). Enacted in 2008, the Illinois BIPA only recently triggered an avalanche of class actions in Illinois, spurring other
New York Could Become the Next Hotbed of Class Action Litigation Over Biometric Privacy
Dubbed the “Biometric Privacy Act,” New York Assembly Bill 27 (“BPA”) is virtually identical to the Biometric Information Privacy Act in Illinois, 740 ILCS 14 et seq. (BIPA). Enacted in 2008, BIPA only recently triggered thousands of class actions in Illinois. If the BPA is enacted in New York, it likely will not take as
COVID-19 Screening Program Can Lead to Litigation Concerning Biometric Information, BIPA
As organizations aim to return to some type of normalcy, and help ensure a healthy and safe workplace, many have implemented COVID-19 screening programs that check for symptoms, and an employee’s recent travel and potential contact with the virus. Moreover, many states and localities across the nation are mandating or recommending the implementation of COVID-19
National Biometric Information Privacy Act, Proposed by Sens. Jeff Merkley and Bernie Sanders
Whether it is facial recognition technology being used in connection with COVID-19 screening tools and in law enforcement, continued use of fingerprint-based time management systems, or the use of various biometric identifiers for physical security and access management, applications involving biometric identifiers and information in the public and private sectors continue to grow. Concerns about
New York SHIELD Act FAQs
Over the past few months, businesses across the country have been focused on the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) which dramatically expands privacy rights for California residents and provides a strong incentive for businesses to implement reasonable safeguards to protect personal information. That focus is turning back east as the Stop Hacks and Improve Electronic Data Security Act (SHIELD Act), becomes effective in less than two weeks. With the goal of strengthening protection for New York residents against data breaches affecting their private information, the SHIELD Act imposes more expansive data security and updates its existing data breach notification requirements.
This post highlights some features of the SHIELD Act. Given the complexities involved, organizations would be well-served to address their particular situations with experienced counsel.
When does the SHIELD Act become effective?
The SHIELD Act has two effective dates:
- October 23, 2019 – Changes to the existing breach notification rules
- March 21, 2020 – Data security requirements
Which businesses are covered by the SHIELD Act?
The SHIELD Act’s obligations apply to “[a]ny person or business which owns or licenses computerized data which includes private information” of a resident of New York. Previously, the obligation to provide notification of a data breach under New York’s breach notification law applied only to persons or businesses that conducted business in New York.
Are there any exceptions for small businesses?
As before the SHIELD Act, there are no exceptions for small businesses in the breach notification rule. A small business that experiences a data breach affecting the private information of New York residents must notify the affected persons. The same is true for persons or businesses that maintain (but do not own) computerized data that includes private information of New York residents. Persons or businesses that experience a breach affecting that information must notify the information’s owner or licensee.
However, the SHIELD Act’s data security obligations include some relief for small businesses, defined as any person or business with:
Continue Reading New York SHIELD Act FAQs