FTC Testifies on Geolocation Privacy

The Federal Trade Commission testified before Congress on the Commission's efforts to address the privacy concerns raised by the tracking of information about consumers’ location, as well as proposed legislation to protect the privacy of geolocation data.
Delivering testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee for Privacy, Technology and the Law, Jessica Rich, Director of the FTC Bureau of Consumer Protection, outlined the FTC’s ongoing efforts to protect the privacy of consumers’ geolocation information through enforcement, policymaking, and consumer and business education.
Precise geolocation data is sensitive personal information increasingly used in consumer products and services, the testimony states. These products and services make consumers’ lives easier and more efficient, but the use of geolocation information can raise concerns because it can reveal a consumer’s movements in real time and provide a detailed record of a consumer’s movements over time.
“Geolocation information can divulge intimately personal details about an individual. Did you visit an AIDS clinic last Tuesday? What place of worship do you attend? Were you at a psychiatrist's office last week? Did you meet with a prospective business customer?” the testimony states.
Geolocation information may be sold to companies to help build profiles about consumers without their knowledge or consent, or it could be accessed by cybercriminals, hackers or through surreptious means such as “stalking apps.”
The FTC has used its enforcement authority under Section 5 of the FTC Act to take action against companies engaged in unfair or deceptive practices involving geolocation information. Last month, for example, the Commission entered into a settlement with the mobile messaging app Snapchat, resolving FTC allegations that Snapchat made multiple misrepresentations to consumers about the disappearing nature of messages sent through its service, as well its transmission of users’ geolocation information. The FTC has raised similar allegations involving undisclosed collection and transmission of location data as part of  privacy complaints against a popular flashlight app, as well as a national rent-to-own retailer and one of its software vendors, the testimony states.
In addition to its enforcement activities involving geolocation information, the Commission has conducted studies, held workshops, and issued reports on mobile privacy disclosures, mobile apps directed to kids, and other topics that elucidate best practices for companies collecting, using, and sharing geolocation information, the testimony says.
The testimony also notes the FTC’s ongoing efforts to educate consumers and businesses about protecting the privacy of geolocation information. For instance, the Commission recently released an updated version of ''Net Cetera: Chatting with Kids About Being Online," and it has released guidance directed to businesses operating in the mobile arena to help educate them on best practices to handle sensitive information, such as geolocation information.
The testimony also provides the Commission’s initial views on the Location Privacy Protection Act of 2014, proposed legislation that seeks to improve the transparency of geolocation services and give consumers greater control over the collection of their geolocation information. The FTC supports the goals of the LPPA, and believes it is an important step forward in protecting consumers’ sensitive geolocation information, the testimony states.
In particular, the testimony highlights three important LPPA provisions that are consistent with the Commission’s views:
• The bill defines “geolocation information” as information that is “sufficient to identify the street name and name of the city or town” in which a device is located. This definition is consistent in many respects with the definition of “geolocation information” in the Commission's COPPA Rule.
• The LPPA requires that an entity collecting consumer geolocation information disclose its collection of such information. The Commission has recommended that companies make their data collection practices more transparent to consumers.
• The LPPA requires affirmative express consent from consumers before a covered entity may knowingly collect or disclose geolocation information, and the Commission supports that approach.
In addition, the testimony notes that the LPPA gives the Department of Justice sole enforcement authority and rulemaking authority, in consultation with the FTC. As the federal government’s leading privacy enforcement agency, the testimony recommends that the Commission have rulemaking and enforcement authority with regard to the civil provisions of the LPPA, and that DOJ have enforcement authority for the criminal provisions.
The Commission vote approving the testimony and its inclusion in the formal record was 5-0.
The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 2,000 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC’s website provides free information on a variety of consumer topics. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.

Easier Commutes and Cheaper Housing are Increasing as Main Reasons for Moving, Census Bureau Reports

      Among the 36 million people 1 year and over who moved between 2012 and 2013, 5 percent said the most important reason for moving was to be closer to work or for an easier commute, while another 8 percent cited the desire for cheaper housing, according to a report released today by the U.S. Census Bureau. The most common reasons for moving in 2013 were “wanted new or better home/apartment,” “other housing reason” and “other family reason.”
      The report, Reason for Moving: 2012 to 2013, presents an in-depth look at 19 reasons why people changed residences during the previous year and is the Census Bureau’s first on this topic since 2001.
      The Current Population Survey began asking a comparable version of this question in 1999. Today’s report compares how these reasons have changed over time. In 1999, 3 percent moved to be closer to work or for an easier commute and 6 percent wanted cheaper housing while 21 percent of respondents “wanted [a] new or better home/apartment.” This reason declined to 15 percent in 2013 and was not statistically different from the “other family” reason.
       “We asked people to select the reason that contributed most to their decision to move. Picking one reason can be difficult as moves are often motivated by many different, and oftentimes competing, factors,” said the report’s author, David Ihrke, a demographer in the Census Bureau’s Journey to Work and Migration Statistics Branch. “For instance, if one’s primary reason for moving is to be closer to work or having an easier commute, they may have to sacrifice other preferences. This could include forgoing cheaper housing options or settling for a different neighborhood. If they mainly want cheaper housing, they may have to deal with a longer commute.”
      In addition to presenting the specific reasons for moving, the report combines these reasons into four collapsed categories: housing-related (48 percent); family-related, such as a change in marital status or establishing one’s own household (30 percent); job-related (19 percent); and other (2 percent).
      For people who moved from one county to another, moving because of a job-related reason rose with the distance of the move: 23 percent of moves less than 50 miles and 48 percent of those 500 miles or more. Moving for housing-related reasons showed change in the opposite direction, comprising 42 percent of shorter distance moves and 18 percent of longer distance ones.
      Other highlights:
•         Men were more likely than women to move for job-related reasons.
•         Better-educated people were more likely to move for job-related reasons than those with lower levels of education.
•         Married respondents were the least likely to move for family-related reasons.
•         Moves within the same county were typically for housing-related reasons, while intercounty moves and moves from abroad were more for job-related reasons.
•         Several individual reasons, such as “change of climate,” “health reasons” and “natural disaster,” were each cited as the main reason for moving by fewer than 1 percent of householders.
    The data are analyzed by a range of demographic characteristics, including age, sex, race, Hispanic origin, educational attainment, marital status, labor force status, type of move and distance moved. These national-level data were collected by the 2013 Current Population Survey’s Annual Social and Economic Supplement.
     For people who are seeking to move, dwellr, a new Census Bureau app powered by American Community Survey statistics, can pull up a list of U.S. locations that matches users’ preferences for such variables as city size, geographic region and job type.

DeLauro Statement on USDA Action on PEDv Cases

WASHINGTON, DC—Congresswomen Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), former chairwoman of the subcommittee responsible for funding the US Agriculture Department (USDA), released the following statement today commending USDA for requiring pork producers to report cases of Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea virus (PEDv) and ensuring funds to combat the disease. The fast-spreading virus has killed nearly seven million pigs and piglets, an estimated 10 percent of the U.S. pig population.

“I applaud USDA for its critical, though long overdue actions. In the past year families have seen pork prices skyrocket and farmers have seen millions of pigs die. Yet no one can figure out the cause of this disease. The department in charge of protecting our nation’s food supply should not have taken a year to act. But I hope with resources finally being put in to monitoring PEDv, we will at long last be able to track the cause of this virus and stop it in its tracks.”

Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Legislation Weeks Away, Says DeLauro

Taxes, Warning Labels, & Other Policies to Reduce Soda-Related Diseases are Focus at National Soda Summit

WASHINGTON—National legislation to levy an excise tax on sugar drinks is just weeks away from introduction according to Representative Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), who today addressed the second National Soda Summit via video, saying such an approach would help address the serious damage sugar drinks are doing to our health. 

“When a two-liter cola is 99 cents and blueberries are over three dollars, something has gone very wrong,” said DeLauro, Ranking Member on the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Appropriations Subcommittee.   

DeLauro’s remarks headlined the second day of the summit, which brought leading researchers and scientists, public health officials, foundation executives, and community activists together to discuss the most effective strategies to reduce soda-related diseases such as obesity, diabetes, and heart disease.  An official from New York City’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene described that city’s appeal of a lower court’s injunction against the city’s proposed cap on soda serving sizes as critical for future efforts by the department to take action.  Health activists from California discussed promising efforts in that state to levy local taxes on soda, as well as legislation that recently passed in the state senate that would require warning notices on containers of soda and other sugary drinks.  Representatives from Mexican consumer group El Poder del Consumidor discussed their successful campaign to enact a one-peso-per-liter tax on soda and other junk foods there, which reduced sales by about seven percent.   

“All around the country, public health officials are recognizing soda’s contribution to obesity, diabetes, and heart disease and are working on policies aimed at reducing consumption of sugar drinks,” said Center for Science in the Public Interest executive director Michael F. Jacobson.   

“We are winning,” said Jim Krieger, director of chronic disease and injury prevention at Seattle and King County’s public health department.  “Consumption of soda is decreasing.  Why?  Through effective public awareness campaigns and the growing movement to remove soda from schools, childcare sites, government property, hospitals and work places.  We need to build on this momentum and ultimately we must tax sugary drinks to discourage consumption—identifying them as an unhealthy product and using the revenues to promote health.” 

The conference was organized by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest with support from the American Heart Association, Bloomberg Philanthropies, the California Center for Public Health Advocacy, The California Endowment, and The Kresge Foundation.  The first such summit was held in 2012.

Regarding International Commitment to Innovation, Biotechnology in Wheat

Statement by Bob Stallman, President,
American Farm Bureau Federation,

WASHINGTON, D.C., June 5, 2014—“The American Farm Bureau Federation is proud to be among the 16 forward-looking organizations from the U.S., Canada and Australia united in ensuring wheat supplies remain abundant, while meeting the highest quality and nutrition standards.  Representing about 20 percent of human calorie intake, wheat is an essential part of the global diet and critical to food security.

“Unfortunately, wheat production is on a downward trend around the world because net returns per acre often favor other crops. Wheat demand could very well outstrip the supply in the not-so-distant future.  As such, further innovation in research and biotechnology is key to realizing the promise of improved products, more sustainable production and environmental benefits.

“AFBF supports the effort to synchronize the commercialization of biotech traits in wheat. While acknowledging the importance of commercializing biotech wheat to ensure farmers can meet worldwide demand, we are equally adamant that customer choice is paramount. Where there is demand for non-biotech wheat, we will work to see it is met.

“In addition, we are urging the governments of wheat growing and importing countries to maintain sound, science-based regulatory systems, as well as to adopt reasonable low-level presence policies to keep trade flowing.”