New Report: Risky Analysis: Assessing and Improving AI Governance Tools
Report: From the Filing Cabinet to the Cloud: Updating the Privacy Act of 1974

WPF Participating in G20 Digital Ministerial

WPF’s Pam Dixon is speaking as a stakeholder at the G20 Digital Policies for the Future Multi-stakeholder Conference taking place 6 April in Dusseldorf, Germany. The event brings together 300 G20 country stakeholders to discuss aspects of digital transformation. WPF’s role will be to discuss encouraging transparency and creating confidence in the digital world on panel

WPF at RightsCon to Present on Digital Identity, Digital Rights

We are honored to be speaking on two panels at this year’s RightsCon, an event that takes place 29-31 March in Brussels, Belgium. Both of our panels will be on the 31 of March. Here is some additional reading and information for each of the panels: Panel 1: Managing Concerns Around Digital Identity, Fri, 9:00-10:15, Innovation, 1st Floor….

WPF Report – Privacy, the Precision Medicine Initiative, & the All of Us Research Program: Will Any Legal Protections Apply?

Medical treatments tailored to each individual’s physiology and genetic history have long been a dream, but this dream is data-intensive. The most current effort to turn personalized medicine into a reality is the Precision Medicine Initiative (PMI), which will collect and share biospecimens and health data from over a million volunteers for research — this report analyzes the privacy protections for this initiative.

Analysis & Report | Redress Revisited: Has the Privacy Shield Agreement Between the U.S. and the EU Been Fatally Undermined by President Trump’s Executive Order 13768?

This analysis is an in-depth look at the January 2017 Executive Order 13768, Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States, and its interaction with two laws, the Privacy Act of 1974 and the Judicial Redress Act of 2015. Regardless of the reasons underlying why the order was written, a key question this analysis considers is if the order damages the EU-US Privacy Shield agreement, and what that means.

When TVs watch you: What we learned from the FTC’s VIZIO case

Television maker VIZIO is paying $2.2 million in penalties to settle charges after the FTC and the New Jersey Attorney General’s office brought a complaint against the company for violating its customers’ privacy. The complaint against VIZIO stated that the company collected detailed information on millions of its customers TV viewing habits without their express consent, and that VIZIO facilitated something called “data appending,” which is when even more detailed information is added to existing customer profiles.