Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Thursday July 05 2018, @03:18PM   Printer-friendly
from the first-post^W-amendment dept.

Submitted via IRC for BoyceMagooglyMonkey

Your company has suffered a data breach. The law requires you to fall on your sword, and—at considerable time and expense—provide a government-scripted breach disclosure notice to your customers, including the facts and circumstances surrounding the breach, how it happened, what data was breached and, more importantly, what you are doing about it.

Irrespective of the costs of the breach itself, the government-compelled disclosure may cost you hundreds of thousands of dollars in disclosure costs alone, not to mention the reputational and other costs associated with this compelled speech. To make matters worse, the government-ordered speech does little in and of itself to make consumers safer or better protected against hackers.

[...] The data breach disclosure laws are clearly government-compelled speech. The government has a good reason for wanting companies to make such disclosures, but such reasons may not be "compelling" and the disclosure may not be the least intrusive means of achieving the government's objectives. Under the EU's GDPR regulations, the disclosure is made to the government privacy entity, and only where that entity believes it necessary is a public disclosure made.

In essence, the Supreme Court has found a right of commercial entities not to be required to make notifications and disclosures because they have a first amendment right not to be forced to do so.

Source: https://securityboulevard.com/2018/07/are-breach-disclosure-laws-unconstitutional-in-the-wake-of-supreme-court-abortion-case/


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Thursday July 05 2018, @09:10PM (1 child)

    by tangomargarine (667) on Thursday July 05 2018, @09:10PM (#703247)

    Pro-tip: if they like some aspects of Wal-Mart well enough to override the aspects they dislike and get them to shop there, it means they like Wal-Mart.

    I mean...couldn't you use this same argument to say that heroin addicts really, really like being addicted to heroin?

    Or people with weak willpower just like more things

    --
    "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Thursday July 05 2018, @11:29PM

    by AthanasiusKircher (5291) on Thursday July 05 2018, @11:29PM (#703297) Journal

    I mean...couldn't you use this same argument to say that heroin addicts really, really like being addicted to heroin?

    No.

    But you could certainly say that heroin addicts really, really like heroin, which is frequently true. That would actually be the same argument as used here.