California Lawmakers Advance VoIP Deregulation Bill, CCPA Tweaks

The Senate Judiciary Committee amended or rejected multiple industry backed tweaks to the California Consumer Privacy Act at a more-than-12-hour hearing that lasted into late Tuesday night. Chair Hannah-Beth Jackson (D) tweeted Wednesday she's “pleased we were able to hold the line yesterday against attempts to undermine California’s landmark privacy law before it takes effect.” Some consumer privacy groups applauded.

Commissioners voted last month to strongly oppose the VoIP deregulation bill (AB-1366), an action the agency doesn’t take frequently (see 1906280034). The VoIP bill would renew a 2012 state law prohibiting the CPUC from regulating VoIP. The deregulation will sunset at the end of this year unless AB-1366 passes. Amendments adopted Wednesday included shortening the extension of state VoIP deregulation to five years from 10 years in the original bill.

Clarify the Office of Emergency Services has "authority to administer and enforce all 911 requirements,” suggested a committee bill analysis. “To ensure that the CPUC has sufficient authority to administer and enforce universal service programs, [carrier of last resort] COLR, and basic service requirements,” consider eliminating “codification of past CPUC decisions and clarify that the CPUC has the authority to set and enforce COLR and basic service requirements on a technology-neutral basis.” Make enforceable provisions related to backup power, outage and service restoration, it said.

AT&T shouldn’t decide which communities get internet and who gets resilient and reliable networks, Commissioner Martha Guzman Aceves testified. “These issues are fundamental. They are too important for the state to abandon its role.” Communications Workers of America, League of California Cities and several consumer groups opposed the bill.

With “strong arguments on both sides,” committee amendments “strike a healthy balance,” said Chair Ben Hueso (D). The CPUC has been lacking in its reporting to the legislature, he said. The agency has “proven itself too slow to act,” Gonzalez said. Telecom and cable companies and associations supported it, along with groups saying they represent consumers.

CCPA

The Judiciary Committee advanced three of five CCPA tweaks that consumer privacy groups opposed Monday (see 1907080047). Jackson, whose bill to tighten restrictions stumbled earlier this year, voiced concerns about weakening the law she fought for in 2018. The surviving bills go to the Senate Appropriations Committee, which convenes after the legislature returns Aug. 12.

The committee supported removing a requirement that companies list a phone number for opt-out requests. Common Sense, which had opposed AB-1564, was neutral after the bill was amended. The amendments “return the requirement that a toll-free number be provided for consumers to exercise their rights under the CCPA, but provides more flexibility for certain exclusively-online businesses,” said the committee's bill analysis. An online contact method is efficient and what consumers expect, said Internet Association Director-California Government Affairs Kevin McKinley. The panel supported AB-25 carving out employers with an amendment adding a sunset (see 1907090065), and AB-846 exempting loyalty programs with an amendment restricting sale of information.

The panel split 3-3 to block a bill modifying definitions of “personal information” and “de-identified.” Assemblymember Jacqui Irwin (D) asked for AB-873 to be reconsidered, meaning it can come back before Friday’s deadline to get bills out of policy committees -- though no additional Judiciary hearing is scheduled -- or in the first two weeks of January, Irwin aide Brandon Bjerke told us. The committee decided not to vote on AB-1416 to allow companies to override consumers’ requests to opt out of sale of their data if for government and fraud-detection purposes.

Reaction

AB-873 "would have undermined the CCPA by making dramatic changes to its core definitions," emailed American Civil Liberties Union Northern California Policy Attorney Chris Conley. The committee proposed amendments supported by privacy advocates "that would have narrowed the bill to address the author’s stated concerns -- but that proposal was rejected outright," he said. "That suggests that the real goal of 873 was to radically shrink the scope of the CCPA and deny consumers the control over personal information."

The amended loyalty programs bill is a "huge improvement," emailed Justin Brookman, Consumer Reports director-consumer privacy and technology policy. "Our biggest sticking point on loyalty programs was that they shouldn't be contingent upon the sale of data to third parties. Loyalty programs should be about counting how many coffees you drink so you get the tenth one free, or sending you coupons based on what you buy -- which is all first-party use of data."

In less controversial CCPA votes, Judiciary cleared AB-1146 to exempt vehicle data such as ownership information that’s shared between a dealer and automobile manufacturer in anticipation of a repair; AB-874 clarifying that “publicly available” information includes that lawfully made available from government records; and AB-1355 clarifying business disclosure obligations and excluding de-identified or aggregate consumer information from the definition of personal information.

Other Bills

The Senate Communications panel amended the bill banning carrier throttling of public safety. AB-1699 now would “clarify the durations for which an ISP must lift data restrictions, specify that an ISP must lift data restrictions for first response agencies upon receiving notification of the accounts for which restrictions must be lifted, and allow local agencies to notify their ISPs that data restrictions must be lifted without requiring OES coordination,” said committee bill analysis. The Assembly-passed bill goes to the floor.

“It was a blunder” by customer service, said CTIA Government Affairs Counsel Steve Carlson of the Verizon throttling incident. The wireless industry doesn’t oppose the bill’s concept but is “working on the mechanics of how to make this work,” he said. California passed a net neutrality bill last year.

The Assembly Appropriations Committee cleared a robocalls bill to curb caller-ID spoofing, at another hearing Wednesday. The Senate-passed SB-208 would set a Jan. 1, 2021, deadline for providers to implement signature-based handling of asserted information using tokens (Shaken) and secure telephony identity revisited (Stir) protocols.

Judiciary cleared other telecom and internet bills. The committee cleared AB-911 to establish a mechanism for Californians to voluntarily provide to 911 vital health and safety information (see 1907020039), and AB-1790 to require more transparency by e-commerce markets like Amazon to third-party sellers (see 1905010138).

Jackson praised a bill responding to reports that carriers sold customers’ real-time data location. Requiring opt-in and providing a private right of action in AB-523 “actually puts some teeth into this requirement” that wireless providers not disclose a subscriber’s cellsite location information without consent, the chair said.

Amazon opposes the marketplace bill because it undermines efforts to fight fraud and abuse, misunderstands retail competition, requires the company but not competitors to divulge classified information, and gives bad actors the right to demand return of counterfeit goods, said Marketplace Associate General Counsel Charles Wright. The last concern got some attention by committee members. Sponsor Assemblymember Buffy Wicks (D) will look to fine-tune language as it moves to the floor.