What others are saying about the APRA https://www.commerce.senate.gov/2024/4/what-others-are-saying#:~:text=This comprehensive draft legislation sets,right of action for individuals
Compares to EU GDPR rights https://tuta.com/blog/apra-is-americas-gdpr
EFF favorable on bill but say it should go further https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2024/04/americans-deserve-more-current-american-privacy-rights-act
Some opposition to bill but largely bipartisan https://www.wilmerhale.com/en/insights/blogs/wilmerhale-privacy-and-cybersecurity-law/20240418-new-federal-privacy-bill-draft-hits-congress
Full pdf text of bill https://www.commerce.senate.gov/services/files/E7D2864C-64C3-49D3-BC1E-6AB41DE863F5
I truly despise how I can’t just assume that something does what it says it does on the title. Gotta read a separate article analyzing it or read it in full myself.
Yeah, that’s America for you. Even after reading it I’m still a little confused and distrustful. Everything that it’s saying seems good and rational, so why on earth are any Republicans backing it? Have they been tricked into passing an actual good law that is broadly popular? Have they managed to sneak in some insane line promising Meta a right to my first-born’s soul?
I heard about it on a somewhat right-leaning youtube channel, China Uncensored - the host was surprised it was bipartisan as well. Honestly that channel has been the only reporting I’ve seen on it despite how important it is, and I wonder why Pres. Biden and Democrats in general aren’t more vocal about the bill considering how widely popular it would be.
Around 3:00 in this video if you want to see: https://youtu.be/RqaqGXI1KVY
Democrats CAN’T publicize their good for society bills until AFTER they pass. If they do the MAGAs will just turn it into a partisan issue and it’ll never make it through. Look at the border bill!
As long as they keep it quiet, MAGAs stay quiet and uninformed, this lets the rest of the house function reasonably and bipartisan bills are possible.
It’s so sad that this seems to be the logical answer.
Eh, there’s been a bunch of these attempts that have failed, so I’m not gonna criticize Biden too harshly for not counting his chickens before they’ve hatched. You’re certainly right about the Dems optics issues though, this is the third in a string of huge wins regarding regulation of the tech sector, and it feels like I’ve only seen chatter about it on Lemmy.
Maybe they keep it quiet to prevent too much industry push-back? Even that doesn’t really make sense, industry is definitely aware of what this bill would mean.
Maybe they plan on letting it die in committee and are keeping it quiet to prevent consumer awareness of the bill’s existence - it would certainly be a very popular piece of legislation if it was more widely known.
Well it can’t die in committee, it passed the House. The Senate has shown themselves to be significantly more intelligent and willing to function as a governing body, even if they still have their share of crazies. I wouldn’t be surprised if this moved as quickly as the TikTok ban bill did into law now that it’s passed the biggest hurdle.
Is that how it works? I assumed the Senate had a situation where bills sometimes don’t get voted on as well. This is good news!
They did for quite awhile cause of McConnell, the thing is that the MAGA types kinda broke that control. Also some of the MAGA types will probably vot for this bill because they are very erratic.
Meals for orphans bill (The meals will be made from other orphans).
Oh man I was hoping I could just wrangle up some orphans and collect the food bounty.
Trading orphans for food would be a nice fallback, if I ever get sick of my kid, and a bit peckish at the same time.
It’s so close to the TikTok ban that they probably feel like both bills have the same aims.
I mean, technically both bills do, in that they’re both protecting American’s data. One does it by preventing adversarial foreign interests, the other does it by curtailing adversarial domestic interests.
I just naturally assume ulterior motives.
According to one of the articles, the bill in my post also has restrictions on sharing user data with foreign adversaries.
It’ll be interesting to see what privacy rights we Americans actually have, once it’s goes into law.
It’s a good article, breaks down a lot of the major points. But I still worry about the ‘devil is in the details’, and how it effects regular people day-to-day.
What does a license have to do with the topic?
This cat has a link to the Creative Commons license at the bottom of all of his comments.
How very Facebook will sell your data if you do not copy and paste this message of them.
Their posts show up in Google with ads next to them. That is commercial use, which is prohibited by that license. I wonder if they intend to sue Google.
I believe the CC license requires the right holder to contact the violator and give them 30 days to comply.
So basically Google will remove it if you send them a dmca notice.
It still has to go through the Senate and be signed, there will probably be significant changes before it has a chance to become law.
If I understand the US system correctly, even if this does become law, its still up for interpretation by the supreme court, so it’ll still likely favor Republican interests.
It still has to go through the Senate and be signed, there will probably be significant changes before it has a chance to become law.
For better, or for worse, will be the thing to keep an eye out for.
I was able to find this clip on YouTube of the bills’ sponsors talking about it on CNBC from before it passed the House. Otherwise practically no broadcast about this.
