Kochava isn’t the one advert tech firm with a location information enterprise. And it arguably has (effectively, had) a decrease profile than SafeGraph, for instance, which has been excoriated within the press for promoting data tied to abortion clinic visits.
After the FTC filed its swimsuit, Jessica Lee, a associate on the legislation agency Loeb & Loeb and chair of its privateness, safety and information improvements follow, made the purpose on Twitter that the FTC’s grievance in opposition to Kochava learn like “an indictment of the enterprise mannequin greater than an indictment in regards to the particular practices of 1 enterprise.”
As in, an indictment of advert tech.
Earlier this week, AdExchanger requested FTC Commissioner Alvaro Bedoya throughout his keynote on the NAD’s convention on promoting legislation in Washington, DC, why the fee determined to concentrate on Kochava moderately than some other advert tech firm with a location information enterprise.
And, in response to Bedoya, Kochava was singled out for a motive.
“I think you’re proper, that different firms interact in the identical practices, however not all of them interact within the practices described in that grievance,” Bedoya mentioned. “That is likely one of the causes … I used to be desperate to help our motion in opposition to that firm.”
The FTC’s reasoning
One of many important assertions in the FTC’s grievance is that the info Kochava lists in its information market, often called the Kochava Collective, isn’t anonymized – and uncooked information isn’t good to your well being.
The FTC contends that Kochava didn’t adequately shield its information from public publicity and that, till at the least June 2022, the corporate allowed anybody with an AWS account to simply get hold of a free information pattern and entry to extra information containing data tied to tens of tens of millions of cell advert IDs.
This information may then be mixed with different information (like somebody’s residence tackle from public information or an inference primarily based on the truth that a selected cell phone spends each night time in the identical bodily place) to establish people and observe their visits to delicate places, together with habit restoration services, reproductive well being clinics and locations of worship.
What the grievance doesn’t say is whether or not this was really taking place – however the potential for hurt was sufficient for the FTC to take motion.
And there’s precedent for the FTC taking a stand in opposition to the use or potential use of delicate information in a approach that customers wouldn’t moderately anticipate.
That is in step with different FTC circumstances like Sears and Vizio the place the FTC has mentioned that *delicate* information carries heightened protections — secondary processing unrelated to the transaction and never on the course of the patron could also be per se unlawful. https://t.co/HfZMA4Dk9V pic.twitter.com/tf1z0W3qPL
— Justin Brookman (@JustinBrookman) August 29, 2022
Setting an instance
And talking of precedent, that’s another excuse why Bedoya voted in favor of submitting the grievance in opposition to Kochava. (The top vote was 4-1 in favor, with outgoing FTC Commissioner Noah Phillips as the one dissenting opinion.)
Though FTC Chair Lina Khan units the fee’s general technique, Bedoya mentioned that he’s “significantly thinking about” circumstances like Kochava “the place precedents may very well be established that would inform trade as an entire.”
Bedoya couldn’t say way more, as a result of the Kochava case is actively in litigation, however he did say that when circumstances with the potential to create precedent land on his desk, “these are those I spend essentially the most time on, essentially the most time finding out and essentially the most time speaking to [FTC] workers about.”