Good News: ACLU Calls On Californians To VOTE NO On Bogus 'Consumer Privacy' Proposition 24

from the listen-up dept

Last fall we wrote about the unfortunate situation happening with privacy laws in California. As you may know, California has a new privacy law that recently went into effect. And even though we’re big supporters of privacy here at Techdirt, we’ve noted that the CCPA law is and remains an unmitigated disaster. Much of that has to do with the way it came together. A wealthy real estate developer, Alastair Mactaggart, with little to no understanding of how the internet actually works, spent millions of dollars to get a “consumer privacy” ballot measure on the ballot in 2018. But it was incredibly dangerous and confused. Mactaggart, though, cut a deal: if the California legislation agreed to a privacy law, he would drop the ballot measure. So, the California legislature rushed through a very under-cooked privacy bill, that was written in just a couple of weeks, in order to get Mactaggart to drop his much, much worse ballot measure.

And that’s how we ended up with such a half-baked law. Except, last fall, Mactaggart decided to go back on his word, and said that even though the legislature pushed through the already problematic CCPA to get him to stop his ballot measure, he was going to push for another similar ballot on consumer privacy. For a little while, it looked like he might not get the ballot measure on the ballot, but he did, and now it will be up for a vote in November.

And here’s the thing: as with many ballot measures in California, most voters don’t understand the nuances and details of what they’re voting for, and your average voter, upon seeing a ballot measure that says it will “expand the state’s consumer privacy laws” is likely to vote yes, because that sounds good. Privacy is good, and so privacy laws sound good. But only if you don’t know what the initiative actually does: which would be a huge disaster for actual privacy.

We were actually a bit disappointed last time around that some of the civil society groups we normally support came out in strong support of the CCPA, but this time around, it looks like many are recognizing just how dangerous Mactaggart’s plan is for actual privacy. The various ACLU subsidiaries in California have now come out strongly against the ballot measure, known as Proposition 24, making the argument that it “benefits big tech and corporate interests, and will disproportionately harm vulnerable communities.” As the ACLU notes, the proposition would put the burden on individuals themselves to fill out forms to “protect their privacy.” As the ACLU’s Jake Snow says: “Proposition 24 isn’t privacy protection, it’s privacy paperwork.”

Also, there’s this:

This is the kind of proposition that someone like Mactaggart would love. It lets him pretend that he’s actually a champion of privacy, while actually helping some of the biggest businesses who regularly violate our privacy.

The ACLU announcement mentions a bunch of other civil society groups also coming out against Proposition 24 as well, including Public Citizen and Color of Change. That’s good to see and hopefully the message gets out there: this is no way to craft privacy legislation — especially considering that it’s coming from a rich dude who literally went back on his word mere months after promising to drop his ballot initiative in exchange for a poorly written law.

Filed Under: , , , , ,
Companies: aclu

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Good News: ACLU Calls On Californians To VOTE NO On Bogus 'Consumer Privacy' Proposition 24”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
4 Comments
jimb (profile) says:

a rule of thumb...

I’ve concluded that anything that is "opt out" is probably against your interests. Every policy, every "end user agreement", and almost every "class action settlement" that you have to opt out of to not participate, generally appears to have been crafted to look out for the big player’s interests, or send the bulk of the money to the lawyers… If the "privacy law" is seriously going to protect individual privacy, then all data collection, and all data use and sales must be "opt in" – the default must be "no collection" and "no sale".

Bobvious says:

the survey

Einstein Bagels have a value of your all the visit to them.

a value of your all the visit to them.
……… of your all the visit to them.

They want to know your genuine feelings towards them after visiting the place. That is why they give you an occasion to speak to them through the Einstein Bagels Survey.

OK then, here goes.

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I’m not sure about the former.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...