The National Association of Attorneys General (NAAG) dedicated its summer 2000 meeting to the issue of privacy. NAAG decided to develop a set of “Privacy Principles” that it would offer to Congress as a foundation for federal privacy legislation. NAAG’s draft “Privacy Principles” have been circulated for comment and have met with industry concern. As an educational resource for policymakers, the OPA is making available several comments to NAAG from industry members (both OPA members and non-OPA members). This page is designed to serve as an educational resource. The comments posted here reflect only the positions of the commenting organizations and should not be construed as the position of the OPA.

Comments from Industry and the Alabama Attorney General on the Draft National Association of Attorneys General “Privacy Principles”:

Alabama Attorney General Bill Pryor

Attorney General Bill Pryor wrote a letter to Attorneys General Lockyer and Gregoire — head of NAAG’s Internet Law Project — on the “Draft Privacy Principles” (Draft). AG Pryor’s letter on the Draft reflect his belief that the NAAG Internet Law Project has failed to achieve a “firm grasp of the technical and commercial aspects of the business behavior under review” and that the Draft has “not made the case for government intervention in the free market on the question of internet privacy.” AG Pryor’s other comments are that the Draft:

 

  • “is short on facts,”
  • “misstates the law,”
  • “offers a strained legal argument,” and
  • “ignores a substantial legal argument.”

 

In conclusion, AG Pryor “strongly recommend[s] that NAAG not take a public position on this issue until there has been a more thorough assessments of the benefits as well as the costs to consumers of the new users of internet-generated information, as well as a more thorough assessment of the costs to consumers of any remedy NAAG desires to propose to Congress.”

  • View letter, PDFAmerican Electronics Association* (AeA) Comments

    AeA’s comments show that AeA “believes that the current NAAG principles are neither workable or in the long-term interest of consumers. Specifically, AeA has significant concerns with the following NAAG principles:

    • “No Preemption of States – That federal legislation is unnecessary to promote the free flow of commerce;
    • “Consent or Choice – That the general use or disclosure of personally identifiable information requires affirmative consent from consumers (opt-in).”
    • View Comments

    Association for Competitive Technology* (ACT)

    ACT’s comments note that they are “particularly troubled with the notion that comprehensive privacy legislation is necessary” and are also “concerned with the exclusion of a safe harbor for companies that voluntarily implement privacy programs.” ACT’s other concerns are that “‘comprehensive’ privacy legislation could give consumers false security” and “Privacy Legislation will stifle experimental business models, shortchanging the Internet.”

  • Download Comments (PDF File)Association of National Advertisers* (ANA)

    The ANA’s comments are rooted in its belief that “[i]mposing cumbersome or overly restrictive rules in the electronic marketplace could destroy the interactive value of the Internet.” ANA comments note that:

    • “[It] oppose[s] an ‘opt-in’ requirement for all personally identifiable information,”
    • “[It] supports uniform, federal enforcement of privacy laws,”
    • “The business community is working to protect consumer privacy.”
    • View Comment

    Competitive Enterprise Institute Comments

    The Competitive Enterprise Institute’s (CEI) letter to NAAG noted that:

    • Privacy Regulation-Not a Moderate Approach.
    • Privacy Regulation Will Hurt Small Businesses, Grassroots Groups, and Political Speech.
    • Businesses’ Use of Information Helps Consumers.
    • State Privacy Legislation Risks Trade Wars Between the States.
    • View Letter

    Direct Marketing Association* (DMA) and Internet Alliance* (IA) Comments

    The DMA and IA comments acknowledge a significant role for state attorneys general in protecting citizen privacy on the Internet but note that “if it is determined that legislation is needed in this area, it should be only at the Federal level and it should be limited to notice and choice.” The DMA and IA comments “conclude … that the approach taken in the Draft has serious flaws and applies an antiquated approach to privacy and consumer protection that is ill-suited for the information age, and ultimately is not in the best interest of consumers. In short, the NAAG draft risks unduly burdening the free flow of beneficial commerce and ideas.”

  • Download Comments (PDF File)

 

Information Technology Industry Association* (ITAA) Comments

“ITAA is concerned that by encouraging precipitous and unnecessary regulatory steps intended to enhance privacy, the NAAG Principles may actually give consumers fewer choices and, as technology changes, less privacy. By clinging to technologically obsolete formulas, rather than incorporating the beneficial attributes of Internet communications, NAAG’s draft principles could undermine rather than advance the consumer interest.”

 

 

LEXIS-NEXIS* Comments

LEXIS-NEXIS noted “several concerns with various elements of the Draft, including its positions on preemption and opt-in.” However, LEXIS-NEXIS’ “greatest concern, and the sole focus of these comments, is that the Draft does not make clear any exclusion of public records.” LEXIS-NEXIS’ comments “explain why [it] believe[s] public records should be explicitly exempted from any privacy principles adopted by NAAG.”

 

 

NetCoalition

The NetCoalition’s comments reflect its three over-arching concerns with the conclusions in the Principles:

  • “In opposing preemption of state substantive privacy standards (as opposed to state enforcement authority), the draft does not realistically account for either the inherently interstate — and indeed, international — character of the Internet.
  • “In supporting an across-the-board opt-in standard for privacy, the draft overlooks long-standing differences in treatment between sensitive and non-sensitive information in ways that would have a very negative effect on e-commerce.
  • “In advocating an opt-out standard for information that is not even individually identifiable, the draft completely departs from precedent in U.S. privacy law and would burden even the most privacy-friendly websites in circumstances that do not implicate privacy issues.”
  • Download Comments (PDF File)

 

* Denotes OPA Member