Illinois Governor Approves Business-Friendly Overhaul of Biometric Privacy Law (reuters.com) 38
Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker has signed a bill into law that will significantly curb the penalties companies could face for improperly collecting and using fingerprints and other biometric data from workers and consumers. From a report: The bill passed by the legislature in May and signed by Pritzker, a Democrat, on Friday amends the state's Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) so that companies can be held liable only for a single violation per person, rather than for each time biometric data is allegedly misused.
The amendments will dramatically limit companies' exposure in BIPA cases and could discourage plaintiffs' lawyers from filing many lawsuits in the first place, management-side lawyers said. "By limiting statutory damages to a single recovery per individual ... companies in most instances will no longer face the prospect of potentially annihilative damages awards that greatly outpace any privacy harms," David Oberly, of counsel at Baker Donelson in Washington, D.C., said before the bill was signed. BIPA, a 2008 law, requires companies to obtain permission before collecting fingerprints, retinal scans and other biometric information from workers and consumers. The law imposes penalties of $1,000 per violation and $5,000 for reckless or intentional violations.
The amendments will dramatically limit companies' exposure in BIPA cases and could discourage plaintiffs' lawyers from filing many lawsuits in the first place, management-side lawyers said. "By limiting statutory damages to a single recovery per individual ... companies in most instances will no longer face the prospect of potentially annihilative damages awards that greatly outpace any privacy harms," David Oberly, of counsel at Baker Donelson in Washington, D.C., said before the bill was signed. BIPA, a 2008 law, requires companies to obtain permission before collecting fingerprints, retinal scans and other biometric information from workers and consumers. The law imposes penalties of $1,000 per violation and $5,000 for reckless or intentional violations.
We the Corporations (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm so glad that we established a government to protect the poor little business world from all the little people that hate them so much. Imagine what a horrible country it would be if the government protected the little people, and not the corporations? Why, we'd have clean air and decent, affordable food options. I hear tell there may have even been healthcare for everybody, regardless of economic class, and that there weren't corporate profit centers dedicated to denying health coverage to protect profits. It sounds like a real hell-hole.
I'm so glad we decided that corporations are the best people. They are so much better than those whining fleshbags.
Re: (Score:1)
On the contrary, great job governor! We need to build a database of MAGATs ASAP with fingerprints and all their personal data so we can then send them to re-education camps and sease their bank accounts and assets in a snap like they deserve then pay for our new citizens healthcare with the money. For us normal people, we have nothing to hide and nothing to fear since we are on the right side of things.
Re: (Score:2)
A society is a collection of individuals who have agreed to sacrifice some freedom in return for the benefits that flow from large numbers of people cooperating.
That a small number of people can co-opt this basic contract to remove options from a large number of people and change the terms to favour the small group over the large is why you occasionally need revolutions.
Re: (Score:2)
A society is a collection of individuals who have agreed to sacrifice some freedom in return for the benefits that flow from large numbers of people cooperating.
That a small number of people can co-opt this basic contract to remove options from a large number of people and change the terms to favour the small group over the large is why you occasionally need revolutions.
You would think, as "mature" as we like to think of ourselves as being, we could figure out a way to set up a government that doesn't require revolution to continually be reminded that there are far more "little" people than "important" people. Of course, you'd also think a democratic republic would have enough voices heard to stop this sort of nonsense before it got this far down the path of protecting the few over the many.
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't think that. The larger the group, the lower the collective intelligence is.
Americans are well-manipulated to prevent any sort of truly meaningful "power in the hands of the people" activity. Mostly we are perpetually pushed to opposing political extremes, so we can scream at each other over social issues like abortion and gender-affirmation and such, all the while being kept largely oblivious of the extremely important (but much more boring) fiscal decisions that are made on our behalf (and to
So only $1,000/person? (Score:2)
So not a recurring penalty, but a one-time tax or usage fee to "accidentally" obtain and (mis)use a person's biometric data forever.
Re: (Score:2)
> This was a reasonable fix. It's not "forever" it's EACH violation per person. If they get caught doing it AGAIN with the same data and person then it's easily intentional and 5x as much of a fine!
Yeah, but, as we've seen with other PII, it's not that the same company itself leaks out your info again and again; the damage is done by the very first leak. Now you have a phalanx of nameless, faceless entities that appear and disappear in and out of the thin corporate air, trading your biometric data to
Re: So only $1,000/person? (Score:2)
It will cost a company $1K per customer whose rights are violated. Very, very few industries can just 'absorb' a $1,000 per customer fine as 'just the cost of doing business'.
Imagine Walmart implemented a 'pay by touch' checkout system, then somehow violated the customers rights of all their customers in Illinois... they could be facing billions in fines for violating millions of customers rights... Walmart won't just shrug that off and say it's 'just the cost of doing business."
Government! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Brought to you by:
Senators: Dick Durbin (Democratic Party), Tammy Duckworth (Democratic Party)
Attorney general: Kwame Raoul (Democratic Party)
Governor: J. B. Pritzker (Democratic Party)
Majority Leader: Kimberly Lightford (D)
Political groups: Majority: Democratic (40); Minority: Republican (19)
President Pro Tempore: Bill Cunningham (D); since January 30, 2020
Next election: November 5, 2024
Re: (Score:2)
Oh we’re playing this game? https://www.investopedia.com/a... [investopedia.com]
Meh, show up to your primary election (Score:2)
By the way there is basically no one in the Republican party primary or otherwise who would oppose this legislation. So if you're going to try to fight it you need to fight it in the primary and the only place to do it is in the Democrat primary election.
And I'm not sure why you brought up the senators because this is a state matter not a nati
Re: (Score:1)
Because Duckworth, Durbin or Pritzker are known for their conservative values *rolls eyes*.
The legislation was opposed by Republicans in Illinois but there are also independents and true libertarians there you could vote for.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed, just remember to call them the Predator Class - very few of them are in any way impressive (aside from their Cluster B scores).
Compare with 'an elite athelete' - truly a superb specimen of humanity.
Re: Government! (Score:2)
This is Illinois, a state run by democrats filled with cities run by democrats, this can't be a bad idea, they just haven't explained it well enough. If it really were a bad idea they'd find a way to blame Republicans (if they could find one)...
There's always alternatives. (Score:2)
companies in most instances will no longer face the prospect of potentially annihilative damages awards that greatly outpace any privacy harms
Sounds like some corporate shareholders and C-Level execs will need to face the prospect of potentially annihilative damages and privacy harms some other way.....
Yes, that's Illinois, all right. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not just the governors, it also contains Chicago, one of the most crime and corruption ridden places in the world.
Here are some people that got up for Federal corruption charges (which means even their buddies in the DOJ couldn't hide it anymore) in the past few years:
Former Illinois House Speaker and Democratic Party chair Michael Madigan
State Sen. Emil Jones III - Jones is the sixth state senator to be hit with federal corruption charges since 2019
State Sen. Michael E. Hastings
Former state Sen. Thomas Cul
The corruption capitol of the United States. (Score:2)
Of course something exists outside the US. (Score:2)
Re: Yes, that's Illinois, all right. (Score:2)
They seem to have a lot of shootings in Chicago, I can't wait to see what the Pro-Palestine protesters do in/to Chicago when the DNC convention comes to town - I expect some 'mostly peaceful' protests [youtube.com]...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Chicago is not a warzone. Sure, there are worse places to live in the world, but when it comes to statistics of corruption and organized crime, Chicago has been in the top 100 of every list for over a century.
Re: Yes, that's Illinois, all right. (Score:2)
I wonder if they called back the penalties because the Democrat convention is going to be in Chicago, and if they plan on using biometrics to secure the convention the convention organizers may be afraid of incurring massive fines? Interesting question, but not likely (the Chicago gov't would have to go after the DNC, that's pretty unlikely...)
This really should be a Federal issue (Score:2)
Laws around something as fundamental and important as privacy should be determined nationally, and individual states should have no input into that legislation.
Aside from the obvious moral imperative here, there is a practical one. There is movement of citizens between states, so a citizen guaranteed of privacy in one state is likely to have that privacy raped in another. Once that bit of privacy has been taken, it can't be given back - and eventually, even people who choose to live in privacy-respecting st
bipartisan stuff (Score:1)
Just for the record, here is the full text of the bill [ilga.gov] rather than a link to Reuters.
Single violation per person? (Score:2)
companies can be held liable only for a single violation per person, rather than for each time biometric data is allegedly misused.
That means when you copy a song illegally and give copies to 100 other people, you can only be held liable for a single violation, right?
Re: Single violation per person? (Score:2)
States are now enforcing federal copyright violations? That's weird.
I'm not quite sure biometric policy influences copyright enforcement.
Translation (Score:2)
Translation: Once a (privacy) rape-victim, always a (privacy) rape-victim. Now, kneel before your masters.
Illinois, where fines are a tiny cost of doing business.
Re: Sieg Heil! (Score:2)
Exactly which Republican is responsible for this? The Republican governor? Republican mayors? Which Illinois Republican(s) did this?
Re: Sieg Heil! (Score:2)
The bill passed by the legislature in May and signed by Pritzker, a Democrat, on Friday amends the state's Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) so that companies can be held liable only for a single violation per person, rather than for each time biometric data is allegedly misused.
I repeat signed by Pritzker, a Democrat
improvement... (Score:2)
Privacy is not real, so we would prefer a penalty of $0; but we're happy for what we can get!
Also nerfed the consent section of the law (Score:2)
The bill also explicitly allows companies to obtain written consent to collect biometric information electronically, a key development as many businesses use "clickwrap agreements," emails and text messages to obtain consent rather than asking consumers to sign agreements by hand.
So instead of the very specific, written, have to physically sign it to consent form, they can now just throw a "oh btw you agree to..." in an electronic click-through or buried in terms and conditions.
They turned one of the toughest biometric laws in the nation into garbage. GG Illinois.