On September 5, 2017, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced that it and 32 state attorneys general had settled charges with Lenovo, Inc., regarding the company’s practice of pre-loading advertising software on its laptops that compromised consumers’ cybersecurity and privacy.1 In many respects, the case was reasonably straightforward: the facts as alleged were clear, and the terms of the settlement were not unusual. But what makes this case interesting are the dueling concurrences issued by Acting Chairman Ohlhausen and Commissioner McSweeny regarding the FTC’s authority to challenge omissions. These concurrences continue a debate that has been stirring on and off at the FTC for more than 30 years, and they raise important questions about the agency’s future enforcement priorities.
Continue Reading To Disclose or Not To Disclose: The FTC’s Dueling Concurrences over Deceptive Omissions in Lenovo

On October 3, 2017, the High Court of Ireland issued its decision in Data Protection Commissioner vs Facebook and Schrems concerning the validity of the EU Standard Contractual Clauses (SCCs)—a mechanism used by a very
Continue Reading European Court of Justice to Rule on Validity of Standard Contractual Clauses

On September 5, 2017, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced that it and 32 state attorneys general had settled charges with Lenovo regarding the company’s practice of pre-loading software on its laptops that compromised consumers’
Continue Reading Lenovo Settles FTC Charges Regarding Pre-Installed Software That Compromised Consumers’ Cybersecurity and Privacy