Minnesota Senate votes 58-9 to pass Internet privacy protections in response to repeal of FCC privacy rules
In stark contrast to Congress’s recent vote against the Internet privacy rights of American constituents, Minnesota’s state Senators have voted to add broadband privacy protections at the state level. The protections were added in an amendment to S.F. No. 1937, the Minnesota economic development budget bill, by Minnesota State Sen. Latz. This Internet privacy amendment was introduced as a direct response to the Tuesday 215-205 vote by the House of Representatives for S.J.Res. 34. FCC Internet privacy rules would have come into effect at the end of 2016 and would have forced Internet service providers (ISPs) and telecoms to get permission before selling your private internet history or app data usage, which they also don’t consider sensitive information. These telecoms and ISPs have long been hard at work to dismantle Internet privacy with their words and money – but they have now been stopped in one more state.
In direct response to Congress, Minnesota passes Internet privacy protections
Once this bill passes in the Minnesota House and is signed into law by Governor Mark Dayton, ISPs will be required to obtain “express written approval from the customer” before collecting customer information from their users. Furthermore, it forbids these ISPs and telecoms from refusing to provide service to someone that refuses to approve the collection of their personal data; which, if the online reaction to the repeal of FCC privacy rules is any show of, is a lot of people. The full text of the amendment to S.F. No. 1937 is:
Sec. 17. [237.417] PERSONAL INFORMATION; PROHIBITION.
No telecommunications or internet service provider that has entered into a franchise agreement, right-of-way agreement, or other contract with the state of Minnesota or a political subdivision, or that uses facilities that are subject to such agreements, even if it is not a party to the agreement, may collect personal information from a customer resulting from the customer’s use of the telecommunications or internet service provider without express written approval from the customer. No such telecommunication or internet service provider shall refuse to provide its services to a customer on the grounds that the customer has not approved collection of the customer’s personal information. EFFECTIVE DATE.This section is effective the day following final enactment.
Minnesota State Sen. Limmer, a Republican, said to Twin Cities Pioneer Press:
“We should be outraged at the invasion that’s being allowed on our most intimate means of communication.”
Private Internet Access would like to commend the Minnesota politicians that stood up for what their constituents truly care about. Now that S.J.Res. 34 has passed, fighting for Internet privacy is increasingly happening at the state level instead. As Conor Dougherty wrote in The New York Times earlier this week: Push for Internet Privacy Rules Moves to Statehouses.
Like this article? Get notified by email when there is a new article or signup to receive the latest news in the fight for Privacy via the Online Privacy News RSS Feed.
Comments are closed.
36 Comments
Every state should make this rule.
I fail to see how an Internet service provider differs significantly from the older telephone system. The system provided a connection from point A to point B and was not privy to the contents of the communication passing through it. It was a fees paid service. I pay for my Internet connection in the same manner and the communications using the Internet should be private. Those services that have a reasonable claim to using some of my information pay for it by way of services for which I typically do not pay.
The fact that you don’t see a difference in ISPs compared to the older telephone system shows you don’t understand what an ISP is or the type of data it uses. It would be more apt to say that the old telephone system recorded who you talked to, when you talked to, what you ordered, what you looked at and put them all together in a file.
The information that is being collected by ISPs is closer to wiretaps done by police and federal agents which needed a court order and a warrant to do so (and only after some sort of proof indicating there is a danger). That is the difference.
I would recommend do some research on google.
Hopefully my state PA will follow suit…………
Never thought I’d consider moving to Minnesota….
Just after 11/9, my son and I said, “Well, at least we live in MN.” We figure that it will go down last of all the states.
There is still bipartisan cooperation here, and some sane heads. There was a petition shortly after 11/9 for MN to secede from the US and join Canada. Made the map look weird, I must say. I’m not super happy with Canada right now, either, though.
Ah, lawmakers looking out for “the people” Three cheers