Ninety-three percent of adults say it’s important that they control who can get information about them, said a survey released Wednesday from the Pew Research Center. The Jan. 27-Feb. 16 survey of 461 adults on a GfK panel found that “Americans feel privacy is important in their daily lives in a number of essential ways” but “have a pervasive sense that they are under surveillance when in public and very few feel they have a great deal of control over the data that is collected about them and how it is used,” Pew said. Eighty-eight percent of Americans said it's important that someone isn’t watching or listening to them without their permission. Americans have “exceedingly low levels of confidence in the privacy and security of the records that are maintained by a variety of institutions in the digital age,” Pew said. Six percent of respondents were very confident telcos would be able to protect their data, while 9 percent were very confident credit card companies would be able to protect their data. “While some Americans have taken modest steps to stem the tide of data collection, few have adopted advanced privacy-enhancing measures,” Pew said. A majority of Americans expect organizations, including government surveillance programs, to limit the time they retain records of their activities and communications, Pew said. It said that Americans find it important to “preserve the ability to be anonymous for certain online activities.”

ICANN CEO Fadi Chehadé said he plans to resign from the nonprofit corporation in March to pursue a private sector role outside the domain names industry. Chehadé will remain “available to work closely with ICANN after March 2016 to support the transition to a new leader, as well as to advise” ICANN on issues like the planned spinoff of NTIA’s oversight of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions after his departure, ICANN said in a news release. “During the remaining 10 months of my tenure, it's business-as-usual,” Chehadé said. “My priority remains to continue strengthening ICANN's operations and services to the global community.” A successful IANA transition “does not depend on the leadership of a single individual, but rather the engagement of the global multistakeholder community working collaboratively to ensure that the Internet remains open, secure, and resilient,” said NTIA Administrator Larry Strickling in a statement. “I urge the community to remain focused on the important task of developing a transition proposal, including enhanced accountability mechanisms, that fully meets our conditions and can be implemented in a responsible and timely manner.” The Internet Society is also “deeply committed to seeing the transition through to completion,” said CEO Kathryn Brown in a news release. “Indeed, there is no turning back. We have a responsibility to the users of the global Internet to maintain the momentum for a timely, orderly transition” of the NTIA’s oversight of the IANA functions.

The Center for Digital Democracy filed a cross-motion for partial summary judgment against the FTC Wednesday with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, challenging the agency’s decision to “withhold certain information requested by CDD under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)” related to the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), the court filing said. The FTC asserted on March 23 in its motion for summary judgment that the information was properly withheld under FOIA Exemptions 3 and 4, the filing said. “CDD concedes that some of the information responsive to its request may be withheld from disclosure,” but “disputes the agency’s exemption claims with respect to a substantial amount of the withheld material,” the filing said. CDD and its predecessor the Center for Media Education, were “instrumental in pushing Congress to enact COPPA in 1998” and continue to be active in the law’s implementation by the FTC, the filing said. In July 2014, CDD submitted a FOIA request for all annual reports submitted by safe harbor programs as required by COPPA including those of Aristotle International, Children’s Advertising Review Unit, Entertainment Software Rating Board, the kidSAFE Seal Program, Privacy Vaults Online and TRUSTe, it said. On Feb. 12, the FTC “produced to CDD, in heavily redacted form, the annual reports,” the filing said. Two pages weren't redacted, 33 were partially redacted and 50 pages were withheld in full, it said. The FTC filed a summary motion March 23 asserting an adequate search for responsive records occurred and asked the court to ratify the withholdings under FOIA Exemptions 3 and 4. The FTC said it withheld information from eight categories of information that are exempt from disclosure: nonpublic interpretations and analysis of the COPPA Rule, self-regulatory assessments not required by COPPA, business development plans, compliance oversight tools and logistics, membership statistics and market shares, member correspondence regarding compliance issues, remediation and disciplinary rates, and the identity of members subject to discipline. CDD disputes the FTC’s ability to withhold information on interpretation and analyses of COPPA, membership statistics and market shares, and remediation and disciplinary rates, the filing said. “CDD does not seek information that would identify any particular safe harbor member, but rather seeks only the aggregated information safe harbor programs are required to submit to the FTC annually,” the filing said. The FTC had no immediate comment.

The Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood and Center for Digital Democracy filed an update to an FTC complaint against Google’s YouTube Kids app Tuesday for false and deceptive marketing, a joint news release said. In April, CCFC and CDD were part of a coalition of children’s and consumer groups that filed a complaint and urged the FTC to investigate whether Google’s YouTube Kids app was unfair and deceptive toward children and parents -- a violation of FTC Act Section 5 (see 1504070045). In subsequent research, CCFC and CDD said they found “even more widespread and pervasive” evidence supporting the original complaint, the groups wrote in a letter to the FTC. “Further review of YouTube Kids demonstrates that the app is rife with videos that would not meet anyone’s definition of ‘family friendly’,” the letter said. “YouTube Kids contains many videos that would not only be disturbing for young children to view, but potentially harmful.” A commission spokesman confirmed the agency received the letter and would review it. “As users of YouTube Kids search for material, the app begins to recommend similar videos,” said CCFC and CDD. When the groups conducted their review of the app, “YouTube Kids actually began recommending videos about wine tasting on its app for preschoolers,” it said. The more children search for inappropriate videos, the more inappropriate videos they will be shown, the letter said. Google had no immediate comment. “Federal law prevents companies from making deceptive claims that mislead consumers," said Aaron Mackey, the coalition’s attorney at Georgetown Law's Institute for Public Representation. Google promised YouTube Kids would deliver appropriate content for children, but it has failed to fulfill its promise, Mackey said. “Google gets an 'F' when it comes to protecting America’s youngest kids,” said CDD Executive Director Jeff Chester. The groups allege they found: explicit sexual language presented amid cartoon animation; a profanity-laced parody of the film Casino featuring Sesame Street’s Bert and Ernie; graphic adult discussions about family violence, pornography and child suicide; jokes about pedophilia and drug use; unsafe behaviors such as playing with lit matches; and advertising alcohol products. As of May 11, at least 13 Budweiser commercials were available on YouTube Kids, the letter said. Given the “inadequacies of the screening process and the constant addition of new videos to YouTube Kids, it would be virtually impossible for anyone to catalog all of the inappropriate content that is accessible on the app,” it said. “In the rush to expand its advertising empire to preschoolers, Google has made promises about the content on YouTube Kids that it is incapable of keeping,” said CCFC Associate Director Josh Golin.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau filed a complaint and proposed consent order against PayPal in U.S. District Court in Greenbelt, Maryland, Tuesday, for “illegally signing up tens of thousands of consumers for its online credit product, PayPal Credit,” formerly known as Bill Me Later, CFPB Director Richard Cordray said about the complaint. CFPB alleges PayPal “lured in consumers to this product with deceptive advertising, signed up people without them knowing it, and then mishandled billing disputes when they arose,” Cordray said, which violates the Dodd-Frank Act. “This kind of conduct has no place in the consumer financial marketplace,” he said. Under the proposed consent order, PayPal would pay $15 million in consumer redress, a $10 million penalty and be required to improve disclosures and procedures, a CFPB news release said. Online shopping and the financial products that make it possible are great, but financial services providers need to ensure people are treated fairly and according to the law, Cordray said. "PayPal Credit takes consumer protection very seriously," a PayPal spokeswoman said. "We continually improve our products and enhance our communications to ensure a superior customer experience," she said. "Our focus is on ease of use, clarity and providing high-quality products that are useful to consumers and are in compliance with applicable laws."

Senate Intelligence Chairman Richard Burr, R-N.C., should listen to constituents who are “loud and clear that they not only want [Section 215 of the Patriot Act] to end, but that they are also incredibly dubious about the NSA’s collection practices,” wrote Electronic Frontier Foundation Legislative Analyst Mark Jaycox in a blog post Monday. Burr’s “reliance on the program being effective ignores the conclusions of two independent investigations tasked with looking at the calling records program,” Jaycox said: “The Director of National Intelligence and the Attorney General have written a letter expressing the need to reform the authorities, and essentially end the current program as it currently is.” Jaycox said “if the Executive branch, the Judicial branch, and two independent commissions can't convince Senator Burr, then maybe their fellow lawmakers can.”

The FTC wants the court-appointed consumer privacy ombudsman in RadioShack’s bankruptcy case to recommend against the sale of personal customer data as a stand-alone asset, Consumer Protection Director Jessica Rich told the ombudsman, an agency news release said. RadioShack obtained personal data, including consumers’ names, addresses, email addresses and purchase histories from tens of millions of consumers, Rich said. RadioShack had extensive privacy promises it made to consumers online and in stores, including the promise to not sell consumers’ information or the company’s mailing lists, Rich said. Consumer information should be sold only to another entity that's substantially in the same line of business as RadioShack and that buyer should be bound by the RadioShack privacy policies that were in place when the consumers’ data was collected, Rich said. The buyer should also give consumers notice their data was bought and obtain affirmative consent if the data is to be used in a manner that differs from promises RadioShack made, she said. Rich pointed to FTC intervention in the bankruptcy case of the online retailer Toysmart, which sought to sell customers’ information despite promises made in its privacy policies, as an example of how conditions successfully can be put on the sale of data both to allow the company to divest assets and to protect consumers’ information, the release said. RadioShack’s privacy policy had said (see 1504020032) that “we will not sell or rent your personally identifiable information to anyone at any time.”

Reddit administrators and users are unhappy with harassing behavior on its site, so the site has updated its practices to better curb harassment, an administrators' blog post said Thursday. “For the past six months we have been examining and reviewing reddit’s community policies and practices, collecting and analyzing data, defining our own goals, and making some hard decisions,” reddit said. “We value privacy, freedom of expression, open discussion, and humanity, and we want to make sure that we uphold these principles for all kinds of people,” they said. Some changes have already been made, such as an annual transparency report showing when private information was shared with law enforcement and when content was taken down in response to legal demands or for privacy reasons, the administrators said. In March, reddit’s privacy policy was updated to address revenge porn, and on Wednesday, additional changes were made to be “even more transparent about content that reddit removes for legal reasons,” they said. Reddit announced on Thursday administrators have been looking “closely at the conversations on reddit and at personal safety.” Reddit values freedom of expression and relies on volunteer moderators to determine and uphold rules for subreddits, allowing administrators to step in only when “we see threats to our values of privacy and safety,” they said. As use of the Internet and information available evolves, reddit said, it has seen more harassment and different types of harassment emerge, such as posting links to private information on other sites. “Instead of promoting free expression of ideas, we are seeing our open policies stifling free expression; people avoid participating for fear of their personal and family safety,” reddit said. “Because of this, we are changing our practices to prohibit attacks and harassment of individuals through reddit with the goal of preventing them,” they said. Harassment is defined as: “Systematic and/or continued actions to torment or demean someone in a way that would make a reasonable person (1) conclude that reddit is not a safe platform to express their ideas or participate in the conversation, or (2) fear for their safety or the safety of those around them,” the administrators said.

To ensure law enforcement uses body cameras in a way that enhances civil rights, New America’s Open Technology Institute and 35 other privacy and civil rights organizations and advocates Friday released principles they embraced. They would among other things require law enforcement agencies implementing cameras to: develop camera policies in public; commit to a set of narrow and well-defined purposes for cameras; specify clear operational policies for recording, retention and access; make footage available to promote accountability, an OTI news release said. The principles were spearheaded by the Leadership Conference on Civil & Human Rights. Other groups that supported the principles include the American Civil Liberties Union, Center for Democracy & Technology, Electronic Frontier Foundation and Public Knowledge.

The non-profit Technology Business Management Council established a Commission on IT Cost Opportunity, Strategy and Transparency (IT COST) Wednesday to “define a set of recommendations and best practices for Federal departments and agencies to transparently measure and communicate their IT costs so that Federal CIOs [chief information officers] are better equipped to govern their IT spending and support agency missions with limited resources,” a news release said. The federal government spends more than $78 billion on technology per year, but each agency uses its own standards to measure, benchmark and communicate the value of its technology investments, the release said. Lack of standardization creates numerous challenges and complications, it said. CIOs from the departments of Health, Transportation, Interior, Commerce and Agriculture are participating in the first IT COST Commission meeting, to be held in June. CIOs from Cisco, Hewlett-Packard and DirecTV are also participating. The goal is to release a report in early 2016 outlining a series of recommendations to reduce waste and increase efficiency, demonstrate cost, quality and value of IT spend, and aid in the implementation of the new Federal IT Acquisition Reform Act, the release said.