Menu Close

Google bashes Texas biometric law while another state proposes its own

Nothing is getting easier on the legal front for companies in the United States collecting the biometric identifiers. A lawsuit by the state of Texas against Google has devolved into an ugly critique of privacy laws and other states are working on their own biometric privacy act.

If the 2009 Texas law, called the Capture or Use of Biometric Identifiers Act, truly is the inconsistent word salad as depicted by Google, it will generate more arguments having little to do with the law and wasting time and money for all involved.

That would be the case at least until a new law could be written, which would be an expensive, time-consuming process. And that law probably would not match any other two states’ biometrics laws.

This is happening as lawmakers in other states, including Mississippi this month proposed the Biometric Identifiers Privacy Act, or House Bill 467. This and other efforts follow the state of Illinois’ landmark BIPA.

The Google lawsuit is being waged since October under Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who pokes the shins of Big Tech to raise his visibility. It alleges that Google has broken the 2009 law. It is alleged that Google did not get advance consent for its Photos app and Assistant and Nest hardware-software products to collect Texans’ biometrics.

Residents have no right to action – the freedom to sue on their own until the biometric law, which differs from Illinois’, which lets anyone seek relief.

Google this week filed a response to the state’s lawsuit, and apparently held little of its temper back.

The state has not played “fair” in a case of “misplaced assumptions” related to the prosecution of alleged wrongdoing involving “a little-used statute.” The case is “meandering and internally inconsistent.” It also shoots itself in the foot, according to Google’s filing, making one claim only to undercut the same claim elsewhere.

It is possible that Mississippi lawmakers are watching the Texas case. It would be the closest thing to legislative conformity. Nothing is getting easier on the legal front for companies in the United States collecting the biometric identifiers. A lawsuit by the state of Texas against Google has devolved into an ugly critique of privacy laws and other states are working on their own biometric privacy act.

If the 2009 Texas law, called the Capture or Use of Biometric Identifiers Act, truly is the inconsistent word salad as depicted by Google, it will generate more arguments having little to do with the law and wasting time and money for all involved.

That would be the case at least until a new law could be written, which would be an expensive, time-consuming process. And that law probably would not match any other two states’ biometrics laws.

This is happening as lawmakers in other states, including Mississippi this month proposed the Biometric Identifiers Privacy Act, or House Bill 467. This and other efforts follow the state of Illinois’ landmark BIPA.

The Google lawsuit is being waged since October under Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who pokes the shins of Big Tech to raise his visibility. It alleges that Google has broken the 2009 law. It is alleged that Google did not get advance consent for its Photos app and Assistant and Nest hardware-software products to collect Texans’ biometrics.

Residents have no right to action – the freedom to sue on their own until the biometric law, which differs from Illinois’, which lets anyone seek relief.

Google this week filed a response to the state’s lawsuit, and apparently held little of its temper back.

The state has not played “fair” in a case of “misplaced assumptions” related to the prosecution of alleged wrongdoing involving “a little-used statute.” The case is “meandering and internally inconsistent.” It also shoots itself in the foot, according to Google’s filing, making one claim only to undercut the same claim elsewhere.

It is possible that Mississippi lawmakers are watching the Texas case. It would be the closest thing to legislative conformity.  Read More   

Generated by Feedzy

Disclaimer

Innov8 is owned and operated by Rolling Rock Ventures. The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Any information obtained from this website should be reviewed with appropriate parties if there is any concern about the details reported herein. Innov8 is not responsible for its contents, accuracies, and any inaccuracies. Nothing on this site should be construed as professional advice for any individual or situation. This website includes information and content from external sites that is attributed accordingly and is not the intellectual property of Innov8. All feeds ("RSS Feed") and/or their contents contain material which is derived in whole or in part from material supplied by third parties and is protected by national and international copyright and trademark laws. The Site processes all information automatically using automated software without any human intervention or screening. Therefore, the Site is not responsible for any (part) of this content. The copyright of the feeds', including pictures and graphics, and its content belongs to its author or publisher.  Views and statements expressed in the content do not necessarily reflect those of Innov8 or its staff. Care and due diligence has been taken to maintain the accuracy of the information provided on this website. However, neither Innov8 nor the owners, attorneys, management, editorial team or any writers or employees are responsible for its content, errors or any consequences arising from use of the information provided on this website. The Site may modify, suspend, or discontinue any aspect of the RSS Feed at any time, including, without limitation, the availability of any Site content.  The User agrees that all RSS Feeds and news articles are for personal use only and that the User may not resell, lease, license, assign, redistribute or otherwise transfer any portion of the RSS Feed without attribution to the Site and to its originating author. The Site does not represent or warrant that every action taken with regard to your account and related activities in connection with the RSS Feed, including, without limitation, the Site Content, will be lawful in any particular jurisdiction. It is incumbent upon the user to know the laws that pertain to you in your jurisdiction and act lawfully at all times when using the RSS Feed, including, without limitation, the Site Content.  

Close Bitnami banner
Bitnami