Chris Hoofnagle quoted in Bloomberg Businessweek, February 27, 2014
Chris Hoofnagle … said in an e-mail that while the Google case is “very important,” courts “almost never award the full amount of potential statutory damages in privacy cases. Defendants in these cases often have mitigating circumstances that reduce damage awards, and they argue that extra-large awards violate their due process.”
Christopher Hoofnagle in the news:
Chris Hoofnagle quoted in Bloomberg Businessweek, February 27, 2014
Paul Schwartz, Deirdre Mulligan, Chris Hoofnagle quoted in Forbes TECH blog, January 6, 2014
Paul [Schwartz] explained that the state-federal dialogue has broken down because the current Congress is gridlocked. Meanwhile, California continues enacting “a tidal wave of California privacy laws.” He cautioned against waiting for a “federal Godot,” i.e., expecting Congress to reengage productively on privacy regulation.
Deirdre Mulligan … praised California’s long reputation for privacy leadership. She said regulators outside California look to California as a laboratory of experimentation, and those experiments have ripple effects across the globe.
Chris Hoofnagle quoted in Washington Post, December 10, 2013
“On a macro level, ‘we need to track everyone everywhere for advertising’ translates into ‘the government being able to track everyone everywhere,’” said Chris Hoofnagle, a lecturer in residence at the University of California at Berkeley School of Law. “It’s hard to avoid.”
Chris Hoofnagle quoted in Online Media Daily, December 4, 2013
“Really smart people may come to different conclusions about what ‘sponsored’ means,” said Chris Hoofnagle, a lecturer in residence at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law. Hoofnagle added that he thinks “sponsored by” indicates an arrangement—which was typical on PBS—where a company pays to have its name associated with a show that was created independently. Online, however, “sponsored by” often refers to content that an advertiser has created.
Christopher Hoofnagle interviewed by Marketplace, November 8, 2013
“What’s happening is the privacy risk is changing from 100s of trackers to just a handful of them,” Hoofnagle said. The word is that tech giants just might start tracking our devices. Hoofnagle says right now, consumers can set their browsers to block cookies. But if your device is being tracked? “People will not be able to block collection,” he said. “So you have to trust that they’ll use it responsibly.”
Christopher Hoofnagle quoted in San Jose Mercury News, October 29, 2013
Chris Hoofnagle … predicted the new methods will give consumers “less privacy, because they will have less control.”
Christopher Hoofnagle writes for The Huffington Post, October 21, 2013
In The Circle, Dave Eggers describes a near future where a single company—The Circle—intermediates all communication. Convinced of its own benevolence, Circle employees expand the company’s offerings into creepier and creepier domains, while propounding punched-up versions of the philosophies of Larry Page, Eric Schmidt and Mark Zuckerberg.
Christopher Hoofnagle quoted in San Francisco Chronicle, October 11, 2013
So the move does no favors for the company’s tired mantra of “Don’t Be Evil,” something academics like Chris Hoofnagle, director of Information Privacy Programs at the UC Berkeley Center for law and technology have argued is “an albatross” and should be disregarded because most of Google’s self-described gallantry is prescribed by law anyway.
Chris Hoofnagle quoted in the San Francisco Chronicle, October 2, 2013
“Google knows exactly who you are because there is so much authentication built into Google’s services,” Chris Hoofnagle…said in an e-mail. “We are moving to an authenticated Web where one is always signed in, and that authentication, even if on the surface (it’s) pseudonymous, typically indicates the user’s identity.”
Christopher Hoofnagle writes for San Francisco Chronicle, July 28, 2013
We have to limit the ability of firms to collect and maintain data. Firms take the same position on privacy as the NSA: They believe that collecting data does not raise any privacy interest; only the use of data can create a privacy problem. This is an appealing but dangerous position. It leaves personal information in the hands of institutions desperate to monetize it, with little ability for individuals to prevent or even detect objectionable uses of data.
Christopher Hoofnagle quoted in WUSA9, June 25, 2013
“Stores can take this information to a data-broker and ask them to match up the name with the zip-code in order to get the person’s home address. And they can get other information too. They might be able to get an e-mail address or a phone number as well,” says Chris Hoofnagle with UC Berkeley Law School.
Christopher Hoofnagle quoted in The New York Times, April 22, 2013
Enforcement is at a turning point, Mr. Hoofnagle said, and fines could blossom, especially if a tech company’s privacy violation caused serious harm. “We’re still working out as a society what the harms are for privacy violations, and we’re not likely to see hundreds of millions of dollars in fines unless blood is spilled,” he said. “But you can see how that could happen.”
Christopher Hoofnagle quoted in McClatchy Newspapers, March 18, 2013
Consumer protections for mobile payments aren’t really on policymakers’ agendas, said Chris Jay Hoofnagle…. “The FTC knows about these problems and it has written about them, but we’re very early in this process and these types of data transfers are not noticeable to the consumer, so one question is will the consumer ever object?” he said. “Going to mobile payments – unless rules are put in place – will be zero privacy,” he said.
Christopher Hoofnagle interviewed by National Public Radio, Morning Edition, March 18, 2013
“After all, we are talking about transparency, and many of us exist in a kind of Disneyland of false belief that these systems are well-secured and impervious against wrong-doers.”
Christopher Hoofnagle writes for The Daily Californian, March 18, 2013
CalMail appeared to be one of those poorly performing campus services best handled by a vendor…. And many other schools have outsourced their information technology services to Google and Microsoft. But if we think about this more deeply, we might conclude the opposite: Communications and information services are so critical to academic freedom that trusting them with an outside vendor can be problematic.
Christopher Hoofnagle interviewed by National Public Radio, Morning Edition, January 28, 2013
“Most companies are very secretive about civil and law enforcement requests for user data,” says Chris Hoofnagle, who specializes in privacy issues at Berkeley Law…. “Google is going out on a limb here because, by making these statements, they might be creating customer expectations that certain process will be followed when their data is revealed to law enforcement.”
Christopher Hoofnagle quoted in Associated Press, December 18, 2012
“These services are publicly advertised as ‘free,’ but the free label masks costs to privacy, which include the responsibility of monitoring how these companies sell data, and even how they change policies over time,” said Chris Hoofnagle, director of Information Privacy Programs at the Berkeley Center for Law & Technology.
Christopher Hoofnagle quoted in The Washington Post, December 4, 2012
The “metadata” that’s embedded in files is particularly treacherous, said Chris Hoofnagle, a law professor at U.C.-Berkeley. Businesses made so many accidental releases that several programs now are available to help scrub out comments and deletions in documents that are intended to remain private. Rules in some states govern what information lawyers can use when opposing counsel inadvertently shares private information in metadata fields. The rapid spread of smartphones has made it even harder for most users to monitor the creation and flow of personal information, Hoofnagle said. “It has trapped a lot of people, this problem. We’re often not aware of the metadata that’s created.”
Chris Hoofnagle study cited in The New York Times, November 17, 2012
Among the trackers setting the most cookies on the top 1,000 Web sites in the United States, for example, BlueKai was first, with 2,562 cookies, while Rubicon came in second, with 2,470, according to research conducted last month by the Berkeley Center for Law and Technology.
Christopher Hoofnagle quoted in The New York Times, November 12, 2012
Chris Hoofnagle … said he hoped the data would set a baseline, providing all sides in the debate with empirical information as to the optimum method to regulate tracking. “I’m hoping that it will inform which approach is the best,” Mr. Hoofnagle said. “We are not going to be well-served unless we measure these trends more rigorously.”