Relevance: primary · Type: action
Confidence95%
Colorado Governor Jared Polis vetoed a bill on Tuesday that would have banned companies from using surveillance pricing to set workers’ wages and prices for consumer goods.
Relevance: supporting · Type: background
Confidence90%
The vetoed Colorado bill would have been the strongest in the nation against algorithmic pricing.
Relevance: supporting · Type: event
Confidence95%
Maryland became the first state to approve a law banning surveillance pricing in grocery stores in April.
Jared Polis, Governor
Relevance: primary · Type: quote
Confidence95%
Governor Jared Polis wrote in a public letter that he found the legislation to be overly broad and said it would 'inadvertently capture innocuous uses of technology that in no way harms – and indeed benefits – consumers and workers.'
Jared Polis, Governor
Relevance: primary · Type: quote
Confidence95%
Polis said the bill would 'punish differentially lower prices, not just higher prices.'
Pat Garofalo, director of state and local policy at the American Economic Liberties Project
Relevance: supporting · Type: quote
Confidence95%
Pat Garofalo, director of state and local policy at the American Economic Liberties Project, said: 'Governor Polis had an opportunity to stand with working Coloradans, but instead chose to side with the dominant corporations using invasive surveillance data to pick their pockets.'
Relevance: primary · Type: background
Confidence95%
Colorado’s bill proposed banning companies from using algorithms, powered by artificial intelligence or other data-processing techniques, to set custom prices or wages based on the collection of an individual’s information.
Relevance: supporting · Type: background
Confidence90%
The data used in surveillance pricing could include where an individual lives, what they have bought in the past, their financial status, travel habits, and affiliations.
Relevance: supporting · Type: background
Confidence85%
Critics of surveillance pricing say that companies exploit this data to charge buyers the most that they are willing to pay and give workers the lowest amount they are willing to accept.
Relevance: supporting · Type: background
Confidence95%
Colorado’s measure included exemptions for certain discounts tied to loyalty programs and transparent markdowns for students and senior citizens.
Relevance: supporting · Type: background
Confidence90%
Illinois, California, Massachusetts, and New Jersey are considering bills that would regulate surveillance pricing.
Relevance: supporting · Type: event
Confidence90%
Connecticut’s legislature approved a consumer privacy bill in May that included new rules banning companies from setting individualized prices for goods based on consumer data.
Relevance: supporting · Type: event
Confidence90%
New York’s state senate passed a bill to ban surveillance pricing, but it has not passed the assembly.
Relevance: supporting · Type: event
Confidence90%
Last year, New York enacted a transparency-focused law that forces companies to disclose when they use personal data to set individualized prices determined by an algorithm.
Relevance: supporting · Type: background
Confidence90%
Maryland’s surveillance pricing ban was limited to grocery store items and was criticized by consumer advocates for being riddled with industry carveouts.
Relevance: primary · Type: background
Confidence95%
Colorado’s surveillance pricing bill applied to all companies across industries and covered wages as well as prices.
Relevance: supporting · Type: background
Confidence85%
The Colorado bill would have prevented ride-share firms such as Uber and Lyft from setting individualized wages for drivers based on collected data, as documented in a 2023 study.
Relevance: supporting · Type: background
Confidence80%
Critics of Maryland’s law feared it was watered down by lobbying efforts.
McBrien, staff member at the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC)
Relevance: supporting · Type: quote
Confidence85%
McBrien with the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) said that under Maryland’s law, a company could raise prices for everyone and then offer individualized discounts, but Colorado’s law addressed this loophole.
Relevance: supporting · Type: background
Confidence80%
Critics of Colorado’s bill argued it would disrupt competitive markets and open the door to unnecessary litigation.
Travel Technology Association, trade association representing online travel agencies and short-term rental platforms
Relevance: supporting · Type: quote
Confidence85%
The Travel Technology Association, which represents online travel agencies and short-term rental platforms, called for a narrower definition of 'surveillance data' and testified that the measure would 'prohibit pricing practices that are transparent, pro-competitive, and beneficial to consumers – while exposing travel platforms to litigation exposure that bears no relationship to the harms the bill identifies.'
Relevance: supporting · Type: background
Confidence90%
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has documented examples of surveillance pricing in stores selling clothing, beauty products, home goods, and hardware.
Relevance: supporting · Type: background
Confidence90%
Under the Biden administration, the FTC released an initial study indicating companies use a wide range of personal data when setting individualized prices for consumers.
Relevance: supporting · Type: background
Confidence85%
Current FTC chair Andrew Ferguson characterized the previous administration’s report on surveillance pricing as a rush job.
Relevance: supporting · Type: background
Confidence80%
Consumer advocates say the federal government’s inaction adds to the urgency of states needing to regulate surveillance pricing.
Relevance: supporting · Type: event
Confidence90%
On 18 May, a bipartisan group of 16 state attorneys general wrote to the FTC asking the agency to 'address unfair and deceptive pricing practices across the economy,' including surveillance pricing.
forum Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to comment.