Comments on: It’s Illegal For Offline Retailers To Collect Email Addresses–Capp v. Nordstrom https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2013/11/its-illegal-for-offline-retailers-to-collect-email-addresses-capp-v-nordstrom.htm Fri, 10 Jan 2014 17:41:50 +0000 hourly 1 By: Is Sacramento The World’s Capital of Internet Privacy Regulation? (Forbes Cross-Post) | Technology & Marketing Law Blog https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2013/11/its-illegal-for-offline-retailers-to-collect-email-addresses-capp-v-nordstrom.htm#comment-660 Fri, 10 Jan 2014 17:41:50 +0000 http://blog.ericgoldman.org/?p=11203#comment-660 […] Act, which inhibits retailers from taking reasonable steps to prevent fraud and identity theft (see my recent post criticizing Song-Beverly), and (2) the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act, which has been […]

]]> By: Theperkyone https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2013/11/its-illegal-for-offline-retailers-to-collect-email-addresses-capp-v-nordstrom.htm#comment-659 Mon, 09 Dec 2013 05:35:00 +0000 http://blog.ericgoldman.org/?p=11203#comment-659 I think the whole “aging” argument overlooks another reality. It is true that at this precise moment in time it is possible to have a junk e-mail address, as has been the case for many years. Yet it is also true that many big internet companies have taken strides to eliminate them. For example, Google has made significant strides in reducing the number of anonymous accounts it hosts and now actively discourages them.

Today it seems odd to call an e-mail address PII because it is so easy to hide one’s true identity but it is a mistake to assume that this same ease will exist in the future. It may be that 15 years from now people will be talking about how prescient this ruling is.

]]> By: California Assembly Hearing, “Balancing Privacy and Opportunity in the Internet Age,” SCU, Dec. 12 | Technology & Marketing Law Blog https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2013/11/its-illegal-for-offline-retailers-to-collect-email-addresses-capp-v-nordstrom.htm#comment-658 Thu, 05 Dec 2013 21:05:06 +0000 http://blog.ericgoldman.org/?p=11203#comment-658 […] (Oh yeah, a;most forgot my recent screed against the Song-Beverly law). […]

]]> By: socialforsmallbiz https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2013/11/its-illegal-for-offline-retailers-to-collect-email-addresses-capp-v-nordstrom.htm#comment-657 Mon, 02 Dec 2013 13:55:00 +0000 http://blog.ericgoldman.org/?p=11203#comment-657 Interesting… We use Square Register as our POS and it asks for phone or email to track loyalty program. There’s also an email receipt option. Not in California, but curious to see how this plays out.

]]> By: Michael Risch https://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2013/11/its-illegal-for-offline-retailers-to-collect-email-addresses-capp-v-nordstrom.htm#comment-656 Sat, 30 Nov 2013 13:16:00 +0000 http://blog.ericgoldman.org/?p=11203#comment-656 Great post. A couple thoughts:
1. The law only hasn’t held up well over time if you think offline retailers should be collecting this type of information. If you think that online retailers go to far, then the exceptionalism argument goes the other way, the online retailers are allowed to avoid a rule that everyone else has to follow. I’m not taking a position on it, just pointing out the other side.
2. As for paper v. email, I love email receipts, but aren’t paper receipts required to ensure that stores don’t add bogus charges at the point of sale? It happens even today,
3. This is about voluntary v. mandatory email. Most people will voluntarily give the email. I don’t think it’s outside the bounds of reason to require paper receipts so that people who are not good with their email (and I know plenty of them) can store away their information however they want. Maybe the apple store doesn’t spam, but I’m sure that others do. Indeed, Eric has a dummy email address for this! That alone says to me that it’s a concern, if nothing else.

]]>