United States: U.S. Congress Ready To Enact Data Security And Breach Notification Rules After Recent Consumer Data Breaches

Last Updated: February 20 2014
Article by Mauricio F. Paez, Mina R. Saifi and Richard J. Johnson

In December 2013, a U.S. national retail store announced that credit and debit card data for more than 40 million consumers may have been compromised. On January 10, it further disclosed that cyber criminals had accessed a wide range of personal information belonging to 70 million people through point-of-sale terminals—equipment that annually facilitates more than $3 trillion in U.S. customer transactions throughout various industries.1 Another major retailer has since made similar disclosures. These are the latest known victims of cyber attacks that have targeted payment systems and consumer data collections and have exposed millions of Americans to the threat of identity theft.

After a series of hearings this past week, Congress appears ready to enact a national data protection and breach notification law.

Existing Data Protection and Breach Notification Laws

Currently, in the United States, a company's possession and use of consumer data is regulated by a patchwork of industry-specific federal laws and generally applicable state data protection and/or notification laws. At the federal level, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ("GLBA") and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA") are two prominent examples. The GLBA applies to financial institutions and provides for the implementation of standards to limit the purposeful disclosure of and protect against unauthorized access to consumers' "nonpublic personal information."2 The GLBA also mandates that a financial institution provide to its consumers notice of its policies on sharing nonpublic personal information.3 HIPAA, on the other hand, sets national standards for the security of electronically protected health information.4 Additionally, HIPAA requires covered entities—i.e., health care providers, health plans, and health care clearinghouses—and business associates to give notice to consumers whose unsecured protected health information has been compromised due to a breach.5

In addition to industry-specific federal laws, there are numerous state and territorial personal data protection laws. While these laws serve the same general purpose of protecting individuals from identity theft, some vary as to the obligations they impose. For example, once unencrypted personal information is shown to have been compromised, most state laws require that notice be provided to affected individuals or the company that owns the data, depending on who suffered the breach. Some states also require the company that owns the data to notify consumer reporting agencies in certain circumstances.6 In the same vein, some states require that notice be given to the state's attorney general or other state agency whenever any state resident must be notified of a data breach,7 and other states require such notice only if a certain number of state residents must be notified.8 However, the majority of states do not require any notice to the attorney general or other state agency.9

Likewise, many states require that notice be provided to affected consumers within the most expedient time and manner possible,10 but some set specific time limits within which such notice must be provided.11 Similarly, some state laws are silent as to the required content of the notification,12 while others specifically require that the notification include such items as a general description of the security breach, the types of consumer data compromised, and steps taken to prevent future breaches of that data.13

Finally, a majority of states have not mandated specific security measures for the protection of consumer data. But some states require that an owner or licensor of personal information do one or more of the following: implement reasonable security procedures to protect personal data from unauthorized access,14 maintain written information security programs,15 and impose on third parties to which data is disclosed a contractual requirement to implement the aforementioned procedures. 16

Congress Appears Ready to Act

In view of the recent spate of cyber attacks on retailers and the patchwork of existing laws that greatly complicate a company's data breach response, Congress appears ready to create a national data protection and breach notification law that, in theory, would increase the security of consumers' personal information and simplify the data breach notification process.

Statements made publicly during Congressional hearings this past week evidence a tacit agreement between Democrats and Republicans that a national data protection and breach notification law should not mandate a particular security standard, given that technology is rapidly advancing and that every data breach is factually distinct. That said, Congressional leaders suggested that better technological safeguards are needed, and many pointed to Europe's adoption of "chip-and-PIN" credit cards as an appropriate step forward. For example, Representative Peter Welch (D-VT) noted that "chip-and-PIN technology is what is now being used in Europe and it has better success in preventing fraud."17 Representative Lee Terry (R-NE) noted that the United States "accounts for 47% of the fraud credit and debit losses worldwide, while only accounting for 30% of the transactions."18 And Senator Al Franken (D-MN) and Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) reiterated the same, implying that other countries have been more successful at preventing fraud by using chip-and-PIN technology.19

Although the two political parties agree that consumer information must be better protected, they differ in how this protection should be obtained. Generally, Democrats appear to advocate for a strong national regulation that would impose an obligation upon handlers of consumer data to take reasonable security measures to protect that data and that would grant rulemaking authority to the Federal Trade Commission ("FTC") to promulgate technology-appropriate rules. For example, Senator Franken stated that currently, "there's no federal law setting out clear security standards that merchants and data brokers need to meet. And there's no federal law requiring companies to tell their customers when their data has been stolen."20 He then concluded that "Congress needs to pass laws that promote data security."21 Senator Chris Coons (D-DE) opined that there was "a strong federal role here in ensuring strengthening cybersecurity and privacy."22 Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) observed that "we may need some pressure from the government to make sure that the toughest standards are used."23 Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) said that "any bill that's forthcoming from this institution should provide notification of customers that their data may have been breached so they can protect themselves."24 And Representative Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) advocated for legislation that will ensure that best practices are followed as soon as possible after discovery of the theft of data and suggested a technology-neutral law that allowed the FTC and other agencies the power to update the requisite standards.25

The Republicans set a more cautious tone at the hearings. Representative Terry said that "[f]lexibility, quickness and nimbleness are all attributes that absolutely are necessary in cybersecurity, but run contrary to government's abilities.... We must encourage the private sector to keep improving on its consensus-driven standards, which are built to adapt over time [to] changing threats to data security."26 Representative Mike Pompeo (R-KS) suggested that circumstances may not be ripe for legislation and that Congress should not overreact to media hype.27 He also suggested that consumers may themselves force change by avoiding companies with weak data security measures in place.28 And Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA) argued for a flexible approach in which the government partners with private business to strengthen data security.29 He referred to the voluntary cybersecurity framework being developed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology as a possible model.30

Congress is Not the Only Stakeholder

Although Congress has a strong interest in protecting consumer data, other significant stakeholders participated in the recent Congressional hearings as well. Retail representatives recognized the need for greater transparency and information-sharing when it comes to combating cyber attacks.31 Various witnesses also emphasized that updating payment card technology is important, but that more is needed to address the many consumer transactions that are conducted via the internet and through emerging mobile payment methods.32

Lisa Madigan, the Attorney General of Illinois, advocated for a strong national law but cautioned that federal law should not preempt state laws.33 Rather, she argued that any federal law should establish a floor upon which states can provide stronger protections where necessary and, at the very least, should allow for concurrent state enforcement rights.34 For its part, the FTC voiced support for legislation that would strengthen existing data security standards, require notification in the event of a data breach, and provide to the FTC rulemaking authority under the Administrative Procedure Act and authority to seek civil penalties to enforce the law.35 FTC representatives also favored giving states concurrent enforcement powers and, like most lawmakers, did not support government regulations requiring the use of any particular technological standard, such as chip-and-PIN technology.36

Congress is Quickly Advancing Legislation

Not surprisingly, there are four separate legislative proposals that have been offered in the Senate, one of which was also offered in the House of Representatives. All but one are partisan efforts from the Democratic Party.

Senator Pat Leahy (D-VT), together with co-sponsors Senators Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Franken, and Blumenthal, were the first to sponsor a recent bill.37 Representative Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH) has since offered the same bill in the House of Representatives.38 The bill requires that entities handling personal information of 10,000 or more U.S. citizens implement stringent security measures, including a system of auditing the effectiveness and vulnerabilities of the security system. Should an entity suffer a breach that compromises the security of stored personal information, the entity must notify affected consumers without unreasonable delay, but no later than 60 days after discovery of the breach. If 5,000 or more persons are affected by the breach, or the database affected by the breach stores such information for 500,000 or more persons, the entity must notify federal law enforcement. Credit reporting agencies also must be notified of the breach if 5,000 or more persons are affected.

Shortly after Senator Leahy introduced his bill, Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), together with Senators Mark Pryor (D-AR), Bill Nelson (D-FL), and Feinstein, co-sponsored their own proposal.39 Unlike Senator Leahy's proposal, the Rockefeller bill requires that any business entity that handles personal information implement the prescribed security measures, even if that entity handles data for less than 10,000 persons. Additionally, this bill requires consumer notifications within 30 days of the discovery of a breach. While the bill requires notice to consumer reporting agencies if 5,000 or more persons are affected by a breach, notice to law enforcement under this bill is required only if 10,000 or more persons are affected. The proposed legislation also calls for covered entities to provide for up to two years of credit monitoring services to affected individuals.

The two bills have far more in common, however, than not. Both bills call for the FTC to develop and implement rules and regulations to execute the law. Both measures provide for civil penalties for violations of the security and notification provisions through various enforcement mechanisms, and both also call for criminal liability in the event a person with knowledge of the notification requirements conceals a data breach. The proposals also allow for concurrent enforcement by state attorneys general, although both preempt state data security and breach notification laws. Neither bill, however, allows for a private right of action based on violations of the requirements.

Perhaps motivated by the lack of a private right of action in both of these measures,40 Senator Blumenthal, with the support of Senator Ed Markey (D-MA), also has sponsored his own measure.41 The proposal contains many of the same requirements as the aforementioned proposals, but it differs in a few respects. Rather than provide an absolute deadline by which notice is required to be given to consumers, Senator Blumenthal's proposal simply requires such notice to be given "without unreasonable delay." However, in the event that law enforcement must be notified of the breach, such notice shall be given no later than 10 days after discovering the breach, and consumer notification must be delivered no later than 48 hours after law enforcement receives notice. In addition to providing to the state attorneys general concurrent enforcement powers, the bill also provides for a private right of action to enforce the requirements of and to recover damages for any violations of the laws. While the two prior bills cap the civil penalty amount for non-willful or unintentional violations at $1 million and $5 million respectively, Senator Blumenthal's bill provides for up to $20 million in penalties for such violations.

Unlike the other current proposals, and in line with the general consensus that information sharing is the most important weapon against data breaches, Senator Blumenthal's proposal also calls for a to-be-designated federal entity to establish and manage a clearinghouse in which information of data breaches is to be shared. The bill also requires the administrator of the General Services Administration to evaluate the data security programs of a data broker before entering into a government contract totaling more than $500,000 with that entity.

Senators Roy Blunt (R-MO) and Thomas Carper (D-DE) have proposed a bipartisan bill on the matter.42 Their bill is less comprehensive and stringent than the other three proposals. It requires notice of a data breach to affected consumers only if the breach is likely to cause "substantial harm" to consumers. Substantial harm in this context does not include the need for consumers to change their account information or other harms that do not involve identity theft or account fraud. The bill does not establish a timeframe within which notice must be given but instead leaves that task for the rulemaking process. The bill also requires entities to implement certain security measures to protect data, but again leaves the task of providing specific guidance on effective security measures to the rulemaking process. Rather than granting the FTC exclusive rulemaking authority, however, the bill assigns to a number of industry-specific agencies the task of developing, implementing, and enforcing the rules. The bill does not provide for criminal liability, nor does it delineate any specific civil penalty for violating the requirements. This bill also preempts state law, and it does not give concurrent enforcement powers to state attorneys general or provide for a private right of action to affected individuals.

Conclusion

The general consensus among those who testified or otherwise spoke at the Congressional hearings was that more is needed to protect consumer information and to prevent identity theft in the United States. Participants were less agreeable, however, as to specific solutions, and future legislation will better judge the efficacy of these Congressional hearings.

With the widespread availability of sophisticated malware, additional breaches are inevitable. Congress now seems poised to propose new federal legislation that may increase obligations, liabilities, and costs to private industry. Interested parties are encouraged to monitor this rapidly developing area of law.

Footnotes

1. Cheyenne Hopkins, "Senators Call for Update of Data-Theft Rules After Target Breach," Bloomberg Businessweek (Feb. 4, 2014), http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-02-03/senators-call-for-updated-protections-to-combat-data-breaches (citing David Robertson, publisher of the Nilson Report, for the proposition that "[m]ore than $3 trillion in U.S. customer transactions take place each year through the point-of-sale systems infiltrated by the hackers").

2. 15 U.S.C. §§ 6801(b), 6802(a) (2012).

3. 15 U.S.C. § 6803(a) (2012).

4. Health Information Privacy, U.S. Dep't of Health & Human Svcs., http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/ (last visited Feb. 12, 2014).

5. 45 C.F.R Pt. 160 and 164.

6. See, e.g., Mo. Rev. Stat. § 407.1500(2)(8) (2013) (requiring notice be given to consumer reporting agencies in the event that 1,000 or more persons are notified of a data breach).

7. See, e.g., N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law § 899-aa(8)(a) (Consol. 2013).

8. See, e.g.,Va. Code § 18.2-186.6(E) (2013) (requiring notice be given to the state attorney general in the event 1,000 or more persons must be notified of a breach); S.C. Code § 39-1-90(K) (2013) (requiring notice be sent to the Consumer Protection Division of the Department of Consumer Affairs in the event 1,000 or more persons must be notified of a breach).

9. See, e.g., Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 1347.12 (LexisNexis 2013).

10. See, e.g., Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 530/10(a) (LexisNexis 2013).

11. See, e.g., Wis. Stat. § 134.98(3)(a) (2013) (requiring notice be given within 45 days of the entity learning of the data breach).

12. See, e.g., Del. Code Ann. tit. 6, §§ 12B-101 – 12B-104 (2013).

13. See, e.g., Mich. Comp. Laws Serv. § 445.72(6) (2013).

14. See, e.g., Tex. Bus. & Com. Code Ann. § 521.052 (West 2013).

15. See 201 Mass. Code Regs. 17.00 – 17.05 (2013).

16. See, e.g., Cal. Civ. Code § 1798.81.5(c) (Deering 2013).

17. "Rep. Lee Terry Holds a Hearing on Protecting Consumer Info: Hearing Before the Subcomm. of Commerce, Mfg. and Trade of the H. Comm. on Energy and Commerce," 113th Cong. (2014) (statement of Rep. Peter Welch).

18. "Rep. Lee Terry Holds a Hearing on Protecting Consumer Info: Hearing Before the Subcomm. of Commerce, Mfg. and Trade of the H. Comm. on Energy and Commerce," 113th Cong. (2014) (statement of Rep. Lee Terry).

19. "Privacy in the Digital Age: Preventing Data Breaches and Combating Cybercrime: Hearing Before the S. Judiciary Comm.," 113th Cong. (2014) (statements of Sen. Al Franken and Sen. Richard Blumenthal).

20. "Privacy in the Digital Age: Preventing Data Breaches and Combating Cybercrime: Hearing Before the S. Judiciary Comm.," 113th Cong. (2014) (statement of Sen. Al Franken).

21. Id.

22. "Privacy in the Digital Age: Preventing Data Breaches and Combating Cybercrime: Hearing Before the S. Judiciary Comm.," 113th Cong. (2014) (statement of Sen. Chris Coons).

23. "Sen. Mark. Warner Holds a Hearing on Safeguarding Consumers' Financial Data: Hearing Before the Subcomm. on Nat'l Security and Int'l Trade and Finance of the S. Comm. on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs," 113th Cong. (2014) (statement of Sen. Elizabeth Warren).

24. "Privacy in the Digital Age: Preventing Data Breaches and Combating Cybercrime: Hearing Before the S. Judiciary Comm.," 113th Cong. (2014) (statement of Sen. Diane Feinstein).

25. "Rep. Lee Terry Holds a Hearing on Protecting Consumer Info: Hearing Before the Subcomm. of Commerce, Mfg. and Trade of the H. Comm. on Energy and Commerce," 113th Cong. (2014) (statement of Rep. Jan Schakowsky).

26. "Rep. Lee Terry Holds a Hearing on Protecting Consumer Info: Hearing Before the Subcomm. of Commerce, Mfg. and Trade of the H. Comm. on Energy and Commerce," 113th Cong. (2014) (statement of Rep. Lee Terry).

27. "Rep. Lee Terry Holds a Hearing on Protecting Consumer Info: Hearing Before the Subcomm. of Commerce, Mfg. and Trade of the H. Comm. on Energy and Commerce," 113th Cong. (2014) (statement of Rep. Mike Pompeo).

28. Id.

29. "Privacy in the Digital Age: Preventing Data Breaches and Combating Cybercrime: Hearing Before the S. Judiciary Comm.," 113th Cong. (2014) (statement of Sen. Charles Grassley).

30. Id.; see also "Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity, Executive Order 13636, Preliminary Cybersecurity Framework," Nat'l Inst. of Standards and Tech., http://www.nist.gov/itl/upload/preliminary-cybersecurity-framework.pdf (last visited Feb. 12, 2014).

31. See, e.g., "Rep. Lee Terry Holds a Hearing on Protecting Consumer Info: Hearing Before the Subcomm. of Commerce, Mfg. and Trade of the H. Comm. on Energy and Commerce," 113th Cong. (2014).

32. Id.

33. See, e.g., "Rep. Lee Terry Holds a Hearing on Protecting Consumer Info: Hearing Before the Subcomm. of Commerce, Mfg. and Trade of the H. Comm. on Energy and Commerce," 113th Cong. (2014) (statement of Lisa Madigan, Att'y Gen. of Illinois).

34. Id.

35. See, e.g., "Rep. Lee Terry Holds a Hearing on Protecting Consumer Info: Hearing Before the Subcomm. of Commerce, Mfg. and Trade of the H. Comm. on Energy and Commerce," 113th Cong. (2014) (statement of Edith Ramirez, Chairwoman of the FTC).

36. Id.

37. Personal Data Privacy and Security Act of 2014, S. 1897, 113th Cong. (2014).

38. Personal Data Privacy and Security Act of 2014, H.R. 3990, 113th Cong. (2014).

39. Data Security and Breach Notification Act of 2014, S. 1976, 113th Cong. (2014).

40. See "Privacy in the Digital Age: Preventing Data Breaches and Combating Cybercrime: Hearing Before the S. Judiciary Comm.," 113th Cong. (2014) (statement of Sen. Richard Blumenthal) ("[My bill] also provides for ... in my view, very importantly, a private right of action....").

41. Personal Data Protection and Breach Accountability Act of 2014, S. 1995, 113th Cong. (2014).

42. Data Security Act of 2014, S. 1927, 113th Cong. (2014).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Mauricio F. Paez
Richard J. Johnson
 
In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.

Disclaimer

Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.

Registration

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.

Cookies

A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.

Links

This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.

Mail-A-Friend

If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.

Emails

From time to time Mondaq may send you emails promoting Mondaq services including new services. You may opt out of receiving such emails by clicking below.

*** If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of services offered by Mondaq you may opt out by clicking here .

Security

This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.