Bipartisan Antitrust Legislation to Promote App Store Competition Introduced

Last week U.S. Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), and Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) introduced the Open App Markets Act. According to the press release, “ The Open App Markets Act would protect developers’ rights to tell consumers about lower prices and offer competitive pricing; protect sideloading of apps; open up competitive avenues for startup apps, third party app stores, and payment services; make it possible for developers to offer new experiences that take advantage of consumer device features; give consumers more control over their devices; prevent app stores from disadvantaging developers; and set safeguards to continue to protect privacy, security, and safety of consumers.”

Lanton Law is a national boutique regulatory law and lobbying firm that focuses on technology and healthcare/life sciences. If you are an industry stakeholder with questions about the current landscape or if you would like to discuss how your organization’s strategic initiatives might be impacted by either Congress, regulatory agencies or legal decisions, contact us today.

Data Protection Agency (DPA) Legislation Reintroduced

U.S. Senator Gillibrand (D-NY) issued a press release announcing the Data Protection Act of 2021, which would create the DPA, an independent federal agency whose goal is to protect Americans’ data, instill privacy safeguards and work to ensure that there is transparency in data sharing practices. 

There have been some changes to this proposed legislation since last year’s version of the bill. These changes include:

• Supervision of Data Aggregators: Grants the DPA authority to review Big Tech mergers involving a large data aggregator, or any merger that proposes the transfer of personal data of 50,000 or more individuals.

• Office of Civil Rights: Establishes the DPA Office of Civil Rights to advance data justice and protect individuals from discrimination. 

• Enforcement Powers: Improves DPA enforcement powers to oversee the use of high-risk data practices and to penalize, examine, and propose remedies to the social, ethical, and economic impacts of data collection.

• Penalties and Fines: Prohibits data aggregators from committing any unlawful, unfair, deceptive, abusive, or discriminatory data practices; and allows for penalties and fines to be levied if violated, including triple penalties for violations against children.

• Defines Key Terms for Transparency: Provides Key Definitions for Privacy Harm, Data Aggregators, and High-Risk Data Practice, among other key terms.

According to the release “The DPA would be an executive agency. The director would be appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, serves a 5-year term, and must have knowledge of technology, protection of personal data, civil rights, and law. The agency may investigate, subpoena for testimony or documents, and issue civil investigative demands. It may prescribe rules and issue orders and guidance as is necessary to carry out federal privacy laws. The authority of state agencies and state attorneys general are preserved in the Act. The DPA would have three core missions:

1. Give Americans control and protection over their own data by authorizing the DPA to create and enforce data protection rules. 

2. Maintain the most innovative, successful tech sector in the world by ensuring fair competition within the digital marketplace. 

3. Prepare the American government for the digital age.”

Lanton Law’s technology practice has been monitoring privacy developments nationwide. If you are a banking/finance, technology or healthcare/life science stakeholder with questions about the current landscape or if you would like to discuss how your organization’s strategic initiatives might be impacted by either Congress, regulatory agencies or legal decisions, contact us today.

Congressional Legislation on Big Tech is Forthcoming

The U.S. House Antitrust Subcommittee Chairman Cicilline (D-RI) issued a statement shortly after the Committee marked up and approved the Committee’s report which after a 16 month investigation examined the state of competition within the digital economy.

The Congressman’s statement stated: 

“Amazon, Apple, Google, and Facebook each hold monopoly power over significant sectors of our economy. This monopoly moment must end. I’m grateful to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle who worked with me over the past two years to compile this Report, which makes clear that Congress and the antitrust enforcement agencies must step up to restore a competitive marketplace, enhance innovation, and protect our democracy. Now that the Judiciary Committee has formally adopted our findings, I look forward to crafting legislation that addresses the significant concerns we have raised.”

The report is expected to become an official committee report shortly. Lanton Law has been closely monitoring legislation from Senator Klobuchar (D-MN) and Congressman Cicilline (D-RI) and we strongly believe that this year we will see legislation based off of this Committee report to strengthen antitrust laws aimed at tech companies. 

Lanton Law is a national boutique law and lobbying firm that focuses on technology and healthcare. If you are an industry stakeholder with questions about the current landscape or if you would like to discuss how your organization’s strategic initiatives might be impacted by either Congress, regulatory agencies or legal decisions, contact us today.

Technology Industry Groups File Lawsuit Targeting Maryland Digital Ad Tax

A coalition of technology stakeholder associations that include the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA), along with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Internet Association, are suing Maryland Comptroller Peter Franchot (D), over the state’s recent enactment of the state’s online advertising tax; a first in the nation law. We previously wrote a blog post on this tax.

 According to the lawsuit, the plaintiffs “seek a declaration and injunction against enforcement of Maryland House Bill 732 (the Act) insofar as it imposes a “Digital Advertising Gross Revenues Tax” on sellers of digital advertising services. The Act is a punitive assault on digital, but not print, advertising. It is illegal in myriad ways and should be declared unlawful and enjoined.

 Additionally plaintiffs argue “The premise of the law is deeply flawed. Taxing digital advertising revenue will have the opposite of the Act’s intended effect, reducing resources to support the creation and availability of high-quality ad-supported content, leaving the online field overrun by low-quality “junk” content. Meanwhile, the Act will raise costs for consumers and make it more difficult for businesses to connect with potential customers. Simply put, the Act will harm Marylanders and small businesses and reduce the overall quality of internet content—all while doing nothing to stave off the dissemination of misinformation and hate speech.”

We’ll continue to monitor these events as it is almost a certainty that other states will attempt to pass similar legislation. Technology stakeholders including those in digital commerce will continue to be at risk. We at Lanton Law can help. Our legal and policy tools can help offer your organization a clear path forward to navigate what will be changing policies for technology stakeholders. Contact us today to discuss your options.

Apple Gets Legislative Victory in North Dakota For Now

The North Dakota senate voted in opposition of advancing a bill that would have required app stores to enable software developers to use their own payment processing software. This bill directly addressed fees charged by both Google and Apple.

So what would the bill have addressed? 

The proposal applies to a digital application distribution platform for which cumulative gross receipts from sales on the digital application distribution platform to residents of this state exceed ten million dollars in the previous or current calendar year which uses:

• The platform to provide an application that was created by a person domiciled in this state to a user; or

• The platform to provide an application to a resident of this state.

A provider of a digital application distribution platform may not:

a. Require a developer to use the provider's digital application distribution platform as the exclusive means of distributing a digital product to a user. 

b. Require a developer to use the provider's digital transaction platform or in- application payment system as the exclusive means for accepting payment from a user to download the developer's software application, or purchase a digital or physical product or service created, offered, or provided by the developer through a software application.

c. Retaliate against a developer for choosing to use another digital application distribution platform, digital transaction system, or in-application payment system. 

d. Refuse to allow a developer to provide the provider's application or digital product to or through the provider's platform or system or refuse to allow a user access to the developer's application or digital product through the provider's platform or system, on account of the developer's use of another platform or system. A violation of this subdivision is considered retaliation under this section.

If the North Dakota bill would have advanced through the Senate and into the House, this may have spurred other states to take similar measures, as we have seen with legislation that addresses landmark major policy issues. For example Arizona is considering similar legislation.

Now the title of this blog post is “Apple Gets Legislative Victory in North Dakota For Now.” If you listen to the 2/16/21 CNBC interview with State Senator Kyle Davison (R-ND), Senator Davison states something along the lines of if the bill is defeated in the vote today then nothing is really dead until the legislative session is over.

We at  Lanton Law have seen several times in multiple states that when ideas are deemed to be dealt with through a legislative defeat, sometimes that “dead” bill  comes back during the same session in a companion bill, a budget bill or some other “rider.” Many times it comes down to how determined the legislator is at seeing something accomplished. 

This bill is a prime example of how technology stakeholders and stakeholders in other similar sectors are finding that they have to increase their awareness of state and federal policy in order to remain cognizant of fast moving trends and to ultimately ensure compliance. 

We at Lanton Law can help. Our legal and lobbying tools can help offer your organization a clear path forward to navigate what will be changing policies for technology, healthcare and clean energy stakeholders. We are a D.C. based firm with no state boundaries as we are active nationwide. Contact us today to discuss your options.

California Passed Proposition 22 in a Win for Uber & Lyft

Proposition 22’s passage in California on November 3, 2020 will have a major impact on the future of the gig economy not just in California but potentially the rest of the country. 

Proposition 22 involved the issue of whether transportation drivers for app-based entities such Uber and Lyft should be classified as independent contractors. This now means that these companies would be exempt from a California law enacted last year that made it harder for these app-based companies to not classify their workers as employees.    

If you have questions about what this means for you contact Lanton Law. We are experts in the technology and fintech industries and can help stakeholders navigate these evolving markets.