alt Hacker NewsThey need to make it eligible for Class Action lawsuits to be filed if these are ignored. I wrote a script to routinely test opt out on websites and was stunned to see almost 50% had it implemented incorrectly. This includes high-flying tech companies that went public recently.
Under California’s CCPA / CPRA, most enforcement power lies with the California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA) and the California Attorney General, not private individuals. This limits the actual downside to a company vs. an unbounded downside of class-action lawsuit threat.
Replies
godelski • today at 4:43 AM
Would you mind sharing the script?
Widespread pre-dispute binding arbitration agreements with class-action waivers and bans on mass arbitration kind of put a damper on that, and the Supreme Court has upheld those nationwide in ways California can't easily override.
But sure, there are still other legislative tricks they could do, like making it mandatory by default for CPPA / CA AG to do the enforcement when they're made aware of a qualifying situation, overriding any NDAs which prohibit any California resident from informing CPPA / CA AG about such a situation, and allowing California residents to sue CPPA / CA AG for a writ of mandamus ordering them to proceed with the enforcement if they're stonewalling - with an award of attorneys fees if the writ is issued, so as to make such lawsuits financially affordable to ordinary plaintiffs. (I say "mandatory by default" to allow for exceptions which the legislature thinks appropriate, but at least those would be subject to democratic disclosure and debate.)
On topics such as this one, I think the CA legislature and governor are more interested in ineffectually making it seem like they're solving the problem than in effectively solving the problem.