Summer is here, but the insights industry can’t afford a vacation from legislative and regulatory advocacy for our interests. In June, the Insights Association secured significant victories on AI policy, helping defeat legislation in California and Minnesota that would have imposed substantial new restrictions on the use of research data, synthetic data, and AI-enabled insights tools, while engaging with other AI and privacy issues in California, Massachusetts and Congress.
Privacy & Data Security
A House subcommittee delved into federal comprehensive privacy and data security legislation early this month, focused on the SECURE Data Act, a bill endorsed by the Insights Association.
IA also looked at another federal privacy bill, the You Own the Data Act (YODA Act), which would prohibit a lot of data collection, use and storage by a variety of insights companies and organizations. It would be enforced by the FTC and state Attorneys General, with a limited private right of action, but unlike the SECURE Data Act, it would not preempt any state privacy laws.
Meanwhile, in Massachusetts, the state house recently passed their own version of the Massachusetts Data Privacy Act, comprehensive privacy legislation that passed the state senate last fall, with a mixed bag of changes, including punitive private lawsuits against some insights companies.
Further, in the Golden State:
- As the California privacy regulator considered “regulatory changes” on “Notices & Disclosures and Employee Data,” the California Chamber of Commerce warned that the premature introduction of "new rules" would "strain" efforts to comply "with the most recent set of regulatory updates."
- California A.B. 1883 would prohibit using systems or devices to infer a research subject’s demographic data or emotion, or collect their neural data, regardless of consent, with violations punishable by private lawsuits.
- California S.B. 923 would expand deletion rights under the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) and California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA) to cover any personal information a business has collected about an individual, instead of just data collected directly.
- California A.B. 1898, legislation would have required expansive notices to research subjects regarding routine AI and other tools in market research, has died. Those notices would have included potentially confidential and proprietary information.
Artificial Intelligence
The Insights Association had several key victories in June countering AI legislation that posed a significant threat to our industry:
- California A.B. 2027, legislation opposed by the Insights Association that would have prohibited the use of personal information provided by any research subjects (if they received an incentive for participation) for purposes of (1) training artificial intelligence (AI) systems or tools or (2) building synthetic data, personas or respondents, has been defeated.
- A pair of bills in Minnesota that would have restricted the use of AI-like automated decision systems regarding research subjects who receive incentives, and added a new layer of data privacy restrictions, have been defeated. H.F. 4445 and S.F. 4689 would have been enforced via private litigation, creating significant legal risks for organizations conducting market research, analytics and insights in Minnesota.
Also in California, legislation opposed by IA that would require developers of generative artificial intelligence systems to document copyrighted and potential-copyrighted materials utilized by their systems, and the materials’ owners, is being considered again in the state senate.
California Governor Gavin Newsom (D) wants the state to lead the charge in certifying artificial intelligence (AI) systems, at least for state government use, per a recent executive order.
Finally, at the federal level, IA looked into:
- The AI Accountability and Personal Data Protection Act, legislation that would allow private lawsuits against the use of personal information or potentially copyrightable works to train a generative AI system or their reproduction in an AI-generated output; and
- The Children’s Health, Advancement, Trust, Boundaries, and Oversight in Technology Act (CHATBOT Act), legislation that would provide parents more control over kids’ use of artificial intelligence chatbots.
Make Your Voice Heard
Have you checked out the new IA Action Center? It makes it easy to put the voice of the insights community in front of policymakers.
We’ve done the work for you -- explaining the issues and preparing messages you can send in minutes:
- Enter your name and address to connect with your elected officials.
- Review a ready-to-send message (or personalize it).
- Click send, and your message goes directly to your legislators.
Don’t sit out the conversation. Make your voice count now.
The Insights Industry Needs You
The Insights Association can only make the case for the insights industry on these and other important public policy issues across the U.S. with YOUR support. Amidst all the turmoil, IA’s members and sponsors provide the resources necessary to defend and advance the whole industry.
We remain available to answer your questions on these and other legislative, regulatory and legal issues. Please stay in touch.
This information is not intended and should not be construed as or substituted for legal advice. It is provided for informational purposes only. It is advisable to consult with private counsel on the precise scope and interpretation of any laws/regulation/legislation and their impact on your particular business.
About the Author
Based in Washington, DC, Howard is the Insights Association's lobbyist for the marketing research and data analytics industry, focusing primarily on consumer privacy and data security, the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), tort reform, and the funding and integrity of the decennial Census and the American Community Survey (ACS).
Howard has more than two decades of public policy experience. Before the Insights Association, he worked in Congress as senior legislative staffer for then-Representatives Christopher Cox (CA-48) and Cliff Stearns (FL-06). He also served more than four years with a science policy think tank, working to improve the understanding of scientific and social research and methodology among journalists and policymakers.
Howard is also co-director of The Census Project, a 900+ member coalition in support of a fair and accurate Census and ACS.
He has also served previously on the Board of Directors for the National Institute for Lobbying and Ethics and and the Association of Government Relations Professionals.
Howard has an MA International Relations from the University of Essex in England and a BA Honors Political Studies from Trent University in Canada, and has obtained the Certified Association Executive (CAE), Professional Lobbying Certificate (PLC) and the Public Policy Certificate (PPC).
When not running advocacy for the Insights Association, Howard enjoys hockey, NFL football, sci-fi and horror movies, playing with his dog, and spending time with family and friends.