California Attorney General’s Draft CCPA Regulations Continue to Evolve

On March 11, 2020, California’s Office of the Attorney General proposed a second set of revisions to the draft California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) regulations. These proposed regulations were first published on October 11, 2019, and summarized in our previous Alert. The most recent changes come on the heels of modifications to the regulations released on February 10, 2020, which were summarized in this Alert.

The deadline for providing comments to the second set of modified proposed regulations is March 27, 2020.

Overall, most of the changes were of a technical nature and not substantive.

To read the full text of this Duane Morris Alert, which highlights the notable changes, please visit the firm website.

California Attorney General Proposes Modified CCPA Regulations – Overview of Significant Proposed Changes

On February 10, 2020, California’s Office of the Attorney General proposed a modified version of the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) regulations first published on October 11, 2019. The initial proposed regulations were summarized in our previous Alert.

The deadline for providing comments on the modified proposed regulations is February 25, 2020. This Alert summarizes some of the most significant proposed changes to the regulations. A more detailed summary, including new practical CCPA examples, can be found in our blog posts regarding changes to: (1) definitions and consumer notice requirements; (2) requirements for consumer requests and verification; and (3) requirements for service providers, authorized agents, minors, nondiscrimination and calculating the value of consumer data.

View the full Alert on the Duane Morris LLP website.

Webinar: How the CCPA Impacts the Higher Education Industry

The California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 Webinar Series will be hosting its third installment, “How the CCPA Impacts the Higher Education Industry,” to be held on September 5, 2019. The webinar will be presented by Duane Morris attorneys Brandi A. Taylor and Michelle Hon Donovan.

Brandi Taylor
Brandi A. Taylor
Photo of attorney Michelle Hon Donovan
Michelle Hon Donovan

This session provides an overview of the new law and how it applies to schools and companies in the education sector. Nonprofit educational institutions are exempt from the new law. However, it will apply to any for-profit education institutions, service providers and technology companies that collect any information on California residents and meet any of the following criteria:

  • Have an annual gross revenue of $25 million or more;
  • Collect, sell or share for commercial purposes the personal information of at least 50,000 consumers, households or devices annually; or
  • Derive at least 50 percent of annual revenue from selling consumers’ personal information.

To register for this webinar, please visit the Duane Morris website.

U.S. Department of Education Rejects California’s Student Complaint Process But Provides Path to Compliance

Late on Friday, August 2, 2019, the U.S. Department of Education sent a letter to the California Department of Consumer Affairs that rejected California’s proposed complaint process for Californians attending online programs offered by out-of-state public and nonprofit institutions, but provided a clear path to compliance and a promise not to disrupt federal student aid, assuming California takes the steps outlined in the letter. We previously summarized aspects of the 2016 State Authorization Rule in our July 23, 2019, and July 26, 2019, Alerts.

Here are four key takeaways from the Department’s letter.

1. Federal student aid to Californians will not be disrupted IF California takes the steps outlined in the letter to meet the 2016 State Authorization requirements.

The Department’s August 2 letter “assumes” California will do three things: (1) modify its plan to refer student complaints to a California state agency for adjudication, (2) require a California state agency to oversee the investigation of the student complaints and resolve them, according to applicable California state law, and (3) receive complaints regarding issues starting from at least May 26, 2019, the date that the 2016 regulations went into effect.

To read the full text of this Alert, please visit the Duane Morris website.

California-Based Institutions Exempt in Other States Could Also Be Impacted by U.S. Department of Education’s Rules for Online Programs

We reported earlier this week on the U.S. Department of Education’s July 22, 2019, announcement, which clarified that California students attending online programs offered by out-of-state nonprofit and public institutions are not currently eligible for Title IV Federal Student Aid because of lack of a student complaint process. This issue is not limited to California students and could similarly impact students in many states across the country attending online programs offered by all California colleges and universities, including nonprofit, public and for-profit schools. California-based colleges and universities offering online programs in other states must seek state-by-state authorization or exemption because California does not participate in SARA (State Authorization Reciprocity Agreement). Many of these states do not provide a complaint process for exempt institutions.

View the full Alert on the Duane Morris LLP website.

California Legislation Targeting For-Profits Progresses

Tony Guida
Anthony J. Guida Jr.

A package of seven interrelated bills proposing tighter regulation of for-profit and private colleges in California moved closer to becoming law this week — but not fully intact.

One of the bills, a proposal to create the nation’s first state-level gainful-employment rule, was watered down to require only the collection and disclosure of data around employment outcomes of graduates at for-profit colleges.

To read the full text of this article quoting Duane Morris partner Anthony J. Guida Jr., please visit the Inside Higher Ed website.

© 2009- Duane Morris LLP. Duane Morris is a registered service mark of Duane Morris LLP.

The opinions expressed on this blog are those of the author and are not to be construed as legal advice.

Proudly powered by WordPress