Full Text of HB2880 102nd General Assembly
HB2880 102ND GENERAL ASSEMBLY |
| | 102ND GENERAL ASSEMBLY
State of Illinois
2021 and 2022 HB2880 Introduced 2/19/2021, by Rep. Deanne M. Mazzochi SYNOPSIS AS INTRODUCED: |
| |
Amends the Personal Information Protection Act. Provides that individuals and entities have intellectual property rights in their digital identity assets. Provides for the payment of royalties to individuals and entities for access, for the purpose of commercial advertising, to their digital assets. Authorizes civil actions for actual damages and statutory damages. Limits liability of State and local government. Defines terms.
|
| |
| | A BILL FOR |
|
| | | HB2880 | | LRB102 13250 JLS 18594 b |
|
| 1 | | AN ACT concerning business.
| 2 | | Be it enacted by the People of the State of Illinois,
| 3 | | represented in the General Assembly:
| 4 | | Section 5. The Personal Information Protection Act is | 5 | | amended by adding Section 22 as follows: | 6 | | (815 ILCS 530/22 new) | 7 | | Sec. 22. Digital Identity Assets and Royalties. | 8 | | (a) This Section may be referred to as the Digital | 9 | | Identity Assets and Royalties Act or the DIARies Law. | 10 | | (b) Findings. | 11 | | (1) There is a considerable amount of information | 12 | | about an individual that renders that individual unique. | 13 | | This includes, but is not limited to, information | 14 | | involving one's family, partner and social relationships, | 15 | | education, medical history, personal tastes, preferences, | 16 | | travel history, associations, and interests. | 17 | | (2) In an earlier age, information about an individual | 18 | | would have been known to a personal diary and to a | 19 | | comparatively limited few relative to the rest of the | 20 | | population. The information would have been recorded in | 21 | | paper documents that could not readily be accessed without | 22 | | the author's knowledge. The process of creating a | 23 | | "picture" of someone's life, including for advertising |
| | | HB2880 | - 2 - | LRB102 13250 JLS 18594 b |
|
| 1 | | purposes, would have involved considerable time, laborious | 2 | | efforts, and individual effort to cultivate this | 3 | | information involving knowledge and networks. | 4 | | (3) In the digital age, participation in modern life | 5 | | and devices requires an individual to surrender, often | 6 | | without the person's active, knowledgeable, and fully | 7 | | willing consent, detailed information about an | 8 | | individual's life. "Consent" is given in the form of | 9 | | adhesion contracts, where the individual is powerless to | 10 | | negotiate and take action to protect personal privacy | 11 | | interests. Particularly where the party demanding consent | 12 | | has its own disproportionate market power, such as online | 13 | | search engines, social media companies, or payment | 14 | | processors, to not participate is to itself deny | 15 | | participation in modern life, or the public square. It | 16 | | similarly provides disproportionate power to demand | 17 | | adherence to their terms at risk of "deplatforming". | 18 | | (4) Thus, access to a person's individualized digital | 19 | | "footprint", in an age where data collection and storage | 20 | | can be of virtually unlimited size, scope, and scale, by | 21 | | use of computer algorithms and machine learning, and | 22 | | digital computing technologies that allow advertisers to | 23 | | record and track highly granular, individualized | 24 | | information, has considerably changed the dynamics that | 25 | | ordinarily worked to more generally protect an | 26 | | individual's personal privacy from access, intrusion, or |
| | | HB2880 | - 3 - | LRB102 13250 JLS 18594 b |
|
| 1 | | abuse of informational power by unknown third parties. | 2 | | (5) The General Assembly finds that, just as State | 3 | | laws have been put in place to protect the value of | 4 | | intangible assets such as goodwill, brand recognition, | 5 | | trademarks, trade secrets, and the like, it is also | 6 | | necessary for states to protect an individual's | 7 | | intellectual property rights to their digital identity | 8 | | assets. | 9 | | (6) The General Assembly further finds that, in view | 10 | | of the unrelenting ability of digital computing power to | 11 | | gather, process, and store data and to target persons or | 12 | | entities at will, individuals, even if efforts are made to | 13 | | assemble them together in a class action lawsuit, will | 14 | | have difficulty assembling the resources to combat | 15 | | unwanted or unauthorized access to the details of each | 16 | | individual's life and to protect their data and lived | 17 | | experiences from intrusion. | 18 | | (7) The General Assembly further finds that current | 19 | | government efforts to ensure enforcement of abusive powers | 20 | | through the public sector legal process is slow, | 21 | | inefficient, and insufficient to provide individuals with | 22 | | adequate relief. | 23 | | (8) Thus, the General Assembly finds that both | 24 | | statutory damages and a royalty system is necessary to | 25 | | protect an individual's digital identity and assets. | 26 | | (c) An individual or entity that is a lawful resident of |
| | | HB2880 | - 4 - | LRB102 13250 JLS 18594 b |
|
| 1 | | the State of Illinois for a period of at least 30 days is | 2 | | covered by this Act. | 3 | | (d) Individuals and entities have an intellectual property | 4 | | right to exclusively make, use, or sell their digital assets. | 5 | | "Digital assets" include, but are not limited to, information | 6 | | accumulated regarding an individual's or entity's personal | 7 | | information, which includes, but is not limited to, the | 8 | | individual's or entity's family lists, friends lists, | 9 | | associates lists, relationship histories, customer lists, | 10 | | writings, photographs, personal interests, personal history, | 11 | | educational history, employment history, medical history | 12 | | (including RNA and DNA profiles and genetic history), purchase | 13 | | history, voter history, and the like. The concept of a digital | 14 | | asset exclusive to an individual or entity should be construed | 15 | | broadly to encompass any information that could have | 16 | | commercial value to a third-party data mining or advertising | 17 | | company for purposes of creating a digital identity for that | 18 | | individual or entity. | 19 | | (e) After December 31, 2022, any access of an individual's | 20 | | digital assets for purposes of commercial advertising to that | 21 | | individual requires the digital search engine or advertising | 22 | | platform that is accessing the individual's device to pay the | 23 | | individual a royalty for access to that device. Unless the | 24 | | individual sets a higher royalty threshold, which amount may | 25 | | not to exceed $1 per advertisement per day for passive | 26 | | advertisements, for his or her device, the presumptive royalty |
| | | HB2880 | - 5 - | LRB102 13250 JLS 18594 b |
|
| 1 | | shall be $0.01 per advertisement displayed. These amounts | 2 | | shall be re-indexed and adjusted to account for inflation or | 3 | | deflation on January 1, 2030, and every 10 years thereafter. | 4 | | (f) Any access of an individual's or entity's digital | 5 | | assets by a third party that is seeking to gather information | 6 | | from the individual or entity for purposes of database | 7 | | collection, without the express written consent of an | 8 | | individual, is a presumptive infringement on an individual's | 9 | | or entity's digital assets. In the event of such infringement: | 10 | | (1) The affected individual or entity is entitled to | 11 | | recover (A) the actual damages suffered by the individual | 12 | | or entity as a result of the continued infringement of the | 13 | | individual's or entity's intellectual property right and | 14 | | any profits of the infringer that are attributable to the | 15 | | infringement from the breach and (B) statutory damages in | 16 | | the amount of $3,000 per year per breach for a period of 5 | 17 | | years. | 18 | | (2) The burden of proof is on the owner of the digital | 19 | | assets to present evidence only of the infringer's gross | 20 | | profits. The infringer is required to prove his or her | 21 | | deductible expenses and elements of profit not | 22 | | attributable to factors associated with the breach and | 23 | | infringement of the digital assets or privacy rights. | 24 | | (3) It is a separate act of unfair competition for a | 25 | | third-party platform that has accessed digital assets of | 26 | | an individual or entity to threaten to or actually |
| | | HB2880 | - 6 - | LRB102 13250 JLS 18594 b |
|
| 1 | | deplatform an individual or entity, absent notice and a | 2 | | one-year period within which to transition to another | 3 | | third-party platform site. If no other comparable | 4 | | third-party platform sites are available, the third-party | 5 | | platform shall continue to host the individual or entity | 6 | | on the same terms offered to comparable individuals or | 7 | | entities. | 8 | | (4) If the perpetrator of an unauthorized acquisition | 9 | | cannot be found, any entity holding or transmitting the | 10 | | breached digital asset may be responsible for such | 11 | | liability. | 12 | | (5) Nothing in this Section may be construed as | 13 | | imposing liability on a unit of State or local government | 14 | | that is required or otherwise permitted by law to collect, | 15 | | record, or access data of a personal nature in accordance | 16 | | with carrying out its ordinary governmental functions, | 17 | | unless such unit of State or local government | 18 | | intentionally, or with gross negligence, allows its | 19 | | databases holding information about individuals or | 20 | | entities to be breached to the damage and harm of an | 21 | | individual or entity. | 22 | | (g) Interactive computer services civil action. | 23 | | (1) As used in this Section: | 24 | | (A) "Deplatform" means efforts by an interactive | 25 | | computer servicer, or employees thereof, to restrict, | 26 | | censor, suppress, shadowban, modify computer |
| | | HB2880 | - 7 - | LRB102 13250 JLS 18594 b |
|
| 1 | | algorithms, or otherwise prohibit access to the | 2 | | Internet, educational resources, or a social media | 3 | | site. | 4 | | (B) "Interactive computer service" means any | 5 | | information service, system, or access software | 6 | | provider that provides or enables computer access by | 7 | | multiple users to a computer server, including a | 8 | | computer server that provides access to the Internet, | 9 | | or that is offered by libraries or educational | 10 | | institutions, that has claimed immunity from civil | 11 | | liability under federal law, that does not call itself | 12 | | a publisher, or that has taken the position in the | 13 | | public record that it is not a publisher, and has over | 14 | | 1,000,000 users. | 15 | | (C) "Social media site" means a website through | 16 | | which users are able to share and generate content and | 17 | | find and connect with other users of common interests. | 18 | | (2) If an interactive computer service seeks to | 19 | | deplatform an individual or entity that is a legal | 20 | | resident of this State at the time the deplatforming | 21 | | activity occurs and had or held digital assets with the | 22 | | interactive computer service or had or held digital assets | 23 | | accessed by the interactive computer service, then the | 24 | | individual or entity may bring an action for civil damages | 25 | | in the circuit court in the county where the individual | 26 | | being deplatformed resides or in a jurisdiction where an |
| | | HB2880 | - 8 - | LRB102 13250 JLS 18594 b |
|
| 1 | | individual who reasonably would have otherwise received | 2 | | the writing, speech, or publication of the deplatformed | 3 | | individual or entity resides. Attorney's fees shall be | 4 | | awarded to a prevailing plaintiff. | 5 | | (3) It is an affirmative defense by the interactive | 6 | | computer service that the restricted access was reasonable | 7 | | because: | 8 | | (A) The deplatformed writing, speech, or | 9 | | publication was due to a good faith, objectively | 10 | | reasonable belief that the deplatformed material was | 11 | | obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, or excessively | 12 | | violent in violation of law; or, if permitted, would | 13 | | have violated State or federal law. | 14 | | (B) The interactive computer service is a | 15 | | publisher.
|
|