Dash Lavine’s Post

The California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA) Enforcement Division has issued a new advisory on dark patterns.  Under the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), "dark patterns" refer to user interfaces designed to confuse or mislead consumers about their privacy choices. For example, if opt-out options are unclear or hard to find, they might be considered dark patterns. Businesses must offer consumers clear and easy-to-understand choices to exercise their privacy rights. Michael Macko, Deputy Director of the CPPA’s Enforcement Division said, “Dark patterns aren’t about intent, they’re about effect. The law gives consumers the right to make privacy choices without jumping through confusing hoops.” CPPA’s Enforcement Division regularly issues advisories on aspects of the CCPA. These advisories help educate the public and businesses about their rights and responsibilities under the law.    To learn more and read the Enforcement Advisory, visit: https://lnkd.in/gTff_KKZ  

The California Privacy Protection Agency has put out its latest thoughts on "dark patterns" (we now call them "deceptive patterns") - these are deceptive design patterns that may trick users into making decisions against their interests. Symmetrical choices (Yes/No) and easy to understand language are now expected for CCPA compliance. You've seen these types of patterns in online stores where confirm-shaming or other deception happens, e.g. your choices are, "Yes Sign Me Up" vs. "No I Don't Want to Save Money." Even highlighting/auto selecting one choice over another (instead of having symmetrical choices that are the same color) could be violative of the CCPA. It's time to check your UX and confirm that your consumer/user choices are not clouded by deceptive patterns or some "marketing-approved but not-legal-approved" language. Making it as easy to opt-out as it is to opt-in should be part of your review. #darkpatterns #ccpa #cpra #deceptivepatterns #transparency #clarity #ux #privacylaw #iketanilaw #privacy

Today, the California Privacy Protection Agency issued an enforcement advisory regarding dark patterns present in consumer privacy rights. For more on this issue, see the advisory linked below or read our article recently published on this issue: https://lnkd.in/gHZzsHrD

Protecting children's data online is an extremely tricky (but necessary) proposition, which California is discovering as it tries to pass the California Children’s Data Privacy Act 🚸 AG Rob Bonta and the California Privacy Protection Agency are at odds over how to do so; Bonta's supported bill would change CCPA to require opt-ins before companies sell or share the data of consumers 16 and under 👍👎 That's a major change, and as the CPPA has noted, would require age verification that poses privacy risks of its own To compound matters? California is trying to simultaneously push a privacy bill that bans the sharing or 💸 selling of children's personal data to train AI tools, which will also rest on how to safely address age verification provisions. If you're wondering why a 📜 revised federal COPPA 2.0 hasn't passed yet, these conundrums are part of the reason why https://lnkd.in/guV4Mjty #dataprivacy #childrensprivacy #ccpa

California regulators, partnering with enforcement officials from around the world, reviewed more than 1,000 websites and apps for privacy concerns. Here's what they found: 1️⃣ More than 89% of privacy policies were long or used complex language 2️⃣ "Interface interference" was used, with emotionally charged language appearing to attempt to influence user decisions on privacy choices, with more than half of the sites making the least protective privacy choice the easiest to select. 3️⃣ A third of the websites reviewed asked users repeatedly to reconsider their intention to delete their account. 4️⃣ Nearly 40% of websites put up obstacles for users to make privacy choices or access privacy information. 5️⃣ 9% of websites required users to disclose more personal information when trying to delete their account than they had to provide when they opened it.

With no action at the federal level, over a dozen states have enacted comprehensive consumer privacy legislation since 2018. Many of these bills have been significantly watered down by the influence of Big Tech. A recent joint report by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) and the Public Interest Research Group (PIRG) gave six of the 14 state laws that had been enacted at that time a grade of F for how well they protect consumers’ privacy. Another three received Ds and two got C-minuses. That’s 11 state comprehensive privacy laws (nearly 80 percent) with fairly poor grades. Find out more in this week's Capitol Journal https://bit.ly/3z5LRLM #dataprivacy #consumerprivacy #governmentaffairs

California Privacy Protection Agency’s Enforcement Division recently participated in a global privacy sweep that examined more than 1,000 websites and apps. The Global Privacy Enforcement Network (GPEN) sweep involved 26 privacy enforcement authorities from around the world who joined together to search for deceptive design patterns that made it difficult for users to make privacy-protective decisions.  We are encouraged by efforts to identify deceptive design, including dark patterns, that might violate CA-specific law. As the world’s fifth largest economy and a hub of technology and innovation, California plays an important role in privacy regulation, and CPPA regulations prohibit businesses from using dark patterns to obtain consumer consent. Read more about the CPPA’s collaboration with these international regulators:  https://lnkd.in/gT2BUwnc  

With no action at the federal level, over a dozen states have enacted comprehensive consumer privacy legislation since 2018. Many of these bills have been significantly watered down by the influence of Big Tech. A recent joint report by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) and the Public Interest Research Group (PIRG) gave six of the 14 state laws that had been enacted at that time a grade of F for how well they protect consumers’ privacy. Another three received Ds and two got C-minuses. That’s 11 state comprehensive privacy laws (nearly 80 percent) with fairly poor grades. Find out more in this week's Capitol Journal https://bit.ly/3z5LRLM #dataprivacy #consumerprivacy #governmentaffairs

California Privacy Protection Agency Issues Enforcement Advisory on Dark Patterns 🤔 : Businesses should carefully review their user interfaces, including those provided by service providers, to ensure they do not employ dark patterns. Ensure Symmetry in Choices: Design interfaces that offer symmetrical choices, making it equally easy for consumers to opt-in or opt-out. Use Clear Language: Ensure all communications are easy to read and understand, avoiding technical or legal jargon. Consult Legal Resources. https://lnkd.in/gmZM4PtN

Tomorrow is shaping up to be a busy one for privacy lawyers... https://lnkd.in/gHVCS6ZD Reach out if you'd like to discuss the likely impacts and compliance requirements for your organisation, as well as how to get ahead of the anticipated second round of changes in 2025.