Editor's Note: On Wednesday, the Federal Communications Commission announced a $25 million settlement with AT&T for data breaches including the releasing of thousands of customer records, including names, phone numbers and some Social Security numbers.
BroadbandBreakfast.com welcomes commentaries and opinions on this and other subjects from a multitude of viewpoints.
WASHINGTON, April 8, 2015 - The FCC’s settlement with AT&T sets another benchmark for data breach enforcement, with several important developments.
First, it demonstrates the continuing encroachment of the FCC into areas once thought to be the exclusive domain of the FTC. This is a classic data breach enforcement action that typically would have been prosecuted by the FTC until most recently.
Second, it “ups the ante” for such breaches, with a fine two and a half times the previous largest penalty imposed.
Third, it calls into question the integrity of call centers outside of the U.S. The fact that an initial breach was discovered in Mexico, followed by subsequent discoveries in Columbia and the Philippines, suggests AT&T may have a more serious systemic vulnerability rather than a one-off hack.
Forth, and most importantly, it once again calls the question of which agency has enforcement priority: the FCC or the FTC? Will the FTC accept a subsidiary role in enforcement maters where telcos are involved? One could surmise that the FTC could assert a claim against AT&T under Section 5. Given the increasingly frosty relationship between the FTC and FCC on enforcement of incidents triggering dual jurisdiction, its difficult to imagine that there was any significant coordination between the two agencies. This raises a number of potential issues, not the least of which might be potential double jeopardy.
Robert Cattanach is a partner at the international law firm Dorsey & Whitney. He has previously worked as a trial attorney for the United States Department of Justice and was also special counsel to the Secretary of the Navy. Today he practices in the areas of regulatory litigation, including cybersecurity, privacy and telecommunications, civil and criminal enforcement proceedings and international Regulatory Compliance.
Editor’s Note: BroadbandBreakfast.com accepts commentary from informed observers of the broadband scene. Please send pieces to firstname.lastname@example.org. The views reflected in Expert Opinion pieces do not necessarily reflect the views of BroadbandBreakfast.com and Breakfast Media LLC.
- Advocates for Antitrust Enforcement Say Consumer Welfare Standard Only One Layer of Competition Law
- In Law More Than a Year, MOBILE Now Advocates Say Act Requires Further Implementation for 5G Deployment
- Broadband Roundup: Texas Reaches T-Mobile Settlement, Closing the ‘Homework Gap,’ Broadcast Ownership
- UTOPIA Fiber Announces Completion of Latest Round of Funding, a $48 Million Network Expansion
- Prakash Sangam: China’s Huawei Clones Are Greater Threat to National Security than Huawei
Signup for Broadband Breakfast
Intellectual Property4 months ago
In Congressional Oversight Hearing, Register of Copyrights Says Office Is Responding to Online Users
Broadband Data6 months ago
California Report: Income Most Significant Factor in Low Broadband Adoption
Privacy and Security3 months ago
Comparing Privacy Policies for Wearable Fitness Trackers: Apple, Fitbit, Xiaomi and Under Armour
Antitrust3 months ago
Addressing the Impact of Big Data Upon Antitrust is More Complicated Than a Big Tech Breakup
Expert Opinion5 months ago
Geoff Mulligan: A ‘Dumb’ Way to Build Smart Cities
Antitrust3 months ago
Broadband Roundup: Everyone (Almost) Gangs Up on Google, Muni Broadband Fact Sheet, SHLB Anchornet Conference
Broadband Roundup4 months ago
Cable Industry Touts Energy Efficiency, Next Century Highlights Open Access Fiber, Aspen Forum Set
Broadband's Impact5 months ago
Law Enforcement and Advocates of Facial Recognition Technologies Battle Misconceptions