Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Just when businesses thought their privacy policies were finally perfect and that it was safe to assume they had seen the last of the privacy laws, the issue struck again.
And this time, it struck where businesses and their legal advisers might least have expected it, turning regular e-businesses into “financial institutions” and requiring implementation of yet another set of rules.
History of GLB
On Nov. 12, 1999, Congress enacted the Financial Services Modernization Act, commonly referred to as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLB). The purpose of the act was to bring the banking industry up-to-date by allowing banks to engage in a broad range of activities, including offering insurance and brokering services with new affiliates. Subtitle A in Title V of the act, “Disclosure of Nonpublic Personal Information” (NPPI), limits the range of instances in which a financial institution may disclose NPPI about a consumer to nonaffiliated third parties. The act also requires financial institutions to disclose to their customers privacy policies and practices regarding customer information shared with affiliates and nonaffiliated third parties.
On May 12, 2000, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued the Privacy of Consumer Financial Information Rule, which implemented GLB's Subtitle A. Financial companies were required to comply with the new privacy rule by July 1, 2001.
Title V also requires the FTC to establish standards for financial institutions relating to administrative, technical and physical safeguards (Safeguards Rule) to ensure security and confidentiality of customer records and information. On May 17, 2002, the FTC issued its Safeguards Rule, which mandates these standards.
(See www.ftc.gov/os/2002/05/67fr36585.pdf.)
An Overview of GLB
The act requires financial institutions to notify customers about the institution's information-sharing practices and to tell consumers of their right to “opt-out” if they do not want their information shared with certain nonaffiliated third parties. Any entity that receives consumer financial information from a financial institution may be restricted in its reuse and re-disclosure of that information.
GLB's definition of financial institution is extremely broad. Under Section 16 C.F.R. ?313.3(k)(1) of the privacy rule, a financial institution is defined as “any institution the business of which is engaged in financial activities as described in 4(k) of the Bank Company Holding Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1843 (k)).” Suddenly, some e-businesses that have not been commonly thought of as being a type of financial institution are finding themselves labeled as such because they conduct “financial transactions.” In today's e-world, one can trade stock, bank, apply for a credit card, have taxes prepared, request a copy of a credit report and apply for a car or home loan online. All of these transactions qualify the service provider as a “financial institution.” In fact, even activities such as exchanging or transferring money for others, or providing financial data processing and transmission services, qualify a company as a financial institution under GLB.
FTC's Safeguards Rule Standards for Data
The Safeguards Rule mandates standards relating to administrative, technical and physical information safeguards for financial institutions. This rule became effective on May 23, 2003. The stated goals of the Safeguards Rule are to:
Main Provisions of the Rule
The Safeguards Rule requires all covered financial institutions to:
The FTC notes that when implementing the Safeguards Rule, a business must consider all operating areas, particularly employee training and management, information systems and possible managing-system failures.
Employee Management and Training
In addition to step one of the Safeguards Rule, the FTC has issued a few other suggestions on how emp- loyees can help manage security risk.
Information Systems
Step two of the Safeguards Rule requires identification and assessment of security risk. Below are some of the FTC's suggestions on how to maintain customer information security:
Managing System Failures
Step three of the Safeguards Rule requires a security plan. Some steps the government recommends for meeting this requirement are:
Protective Measures Required
The Safeguards Rule's fourth step mandates that financial institutions take “reasonable steps to select and retain service providers that are capable of maintaining appropriate safeguards for the customer information at issue.” The FTC opted not to require specific contractual language, stating in the commentary to the rules that “The commission believes that financial institutions are well positioned to develop and implement appropriate contracts with their service providers” (67 Fed. Reg. 36490). For those looking for more guidance, the following contractual language is suggested:
A provision ensuring that the contract's protective requirements will survive any termination agreement.
The last step of the Safeguards Rule simply requires institutions to evaluate their security programs and adjust them as their business or technology changes, or as otherwise necessary.
Conclusion
The FTC Safeguards Rule is another bend in the e-commerce superhighway, one more in the ever-growing list of regulations that e-businesses and their advisers must know well. These days, it's prudent for any business that collects personal information from customers to have a security plan to protect the confidentiality and integrity of that information. For “financial institutions,” it's not only prudent – it's the law. Awareness is the key. Remember: Knowing is half the battle. For more information on this topic visit the following links:
Just when businesses thought their privacy policies were finally perfect and that it was safe to assume they had seen the last of the privacy laws, the issue struck again.
And this time, it struck where businesses and their legal advisers might least have expected it, turning regular e-businesses into “financial institutions” and requiring implementation of yet another set of rules.
History of GLB
On Nov. 12, 1999, Congress enacted the Financial Services Modernization Act, commonly referred to as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLB). The purpose of the act was to bring the banking industry up-to-date by allowing banks to engage in a broad range of activities, including offering insurance and brokering services with new affiliates. Subtitle A in Title V of the act, “Disclosure of Nonpublic Personal Information” (NPPI), limits the range of instances in which a financial institution may disclose NPPI about a consumer to nonaffiliated third parties. The act also requires financial institutions to disclose to their customers privacy policies and practices regarding customer information shared with affiliates and nonaffiliated third parties.
On May 12, 2000, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued the Privacy of Consumer Financial Information Rule, which implemented GLB's Subtitle A. Financial companies were required to comply with the new privacy rule by July 1, 2001.
Title V also requires the FTC to establish standards for financial institutions relating to administrative, technical and physical safeguards (Safeguards Rule) to ensure security and confidentiality of customer records and information. On May 17, 2002, the FTC issued its Safeguards Rule, which mandates these standards.
(See www.ftc.gov/os/2002/05/67fr36585.pdf.)
An Overview of GLB
The act requires financial institutions to notify customers about the institution's information-sharing practices and to tell consumers of their right to “opt-out” if they do not want their information shared with certain nonaffiliated third parties. Any entity that receives consumer financial information from a financial institution may be restricted in its reuse and re-disclosure of that information.
GLB's definition of financial institution is extremely broad. Under Section 16 C.F.R. ?313.3(k)(1) of the privacy rule, a financial institution is defined as “any institution the business of which is engaged in financial activities as described in 4(k) of the Bank Company Holding Act of 1956 (
FTC's Safeguards Rule Standards for Data
The Safeguards Rule mandates standards relating to administrative, technical and physical information safeguards for financial institutions. This rule became effective on May 23, 2003. The stated goals of the Safeguards Rule are to:
Main Provisions of the Rule
The Safeguards Rule requires all covered financial institutions to:
The FTC notes that when implementing the Safeguards Rule, a business must consider all operating areas, particularly employee training and management, information systems and possible managing-system failures.
Employee Management and Training
In addition to step one of the Safeguards Rule, the FTC has issued a few other suggestions on how emp- loyees can help manage security risk.
Information Systems
Step two of the Safeguards Rule requires identification and assessment of security risk. Below are some of the FTC's suggestions on how to maintain customer information security:
Managing System Failures
Step three of the Safeguards Rule requires a security plan. Some steps the government recommends for meeting this requirement are:
Protective Measures Required
The Safeguards Rule's fourth step mandates that financial institutions take “reasonable steps to select and retain service providers that are capable of maintaining appropriate safeguards for the customer information at issue.” The FTC opted not to require specific contractual language, stating in the commentary to the rules that “The commission believes that financial institutions are well positioned to develop and implement appropriate contracts with their service providers” (
A provision ensuring that the contract's protective requirements will survive any termination agreement.
The last step of the Safeguards Rule simply requires institutions to evaluate their security programs and adjust them as their business or technology changes, or as otherwise necessary.
Conclusion
The FTC Safeguards Rule is another bend in the e-commerce superhighway, one more in the ever-growing list of regulations that e-businesses and their advisers must know well. These days, it's prudent for any business that collects personal information from customers to have a security plan to protect the confidentiality and integrity of that information. For “financial institutions,” it's not only prudent – it's the law. Awareness is the key. Remember: Knowing is half the battle. For more information on this topic visit the following links:
In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Latham & Watkins helped the largest U.S. commercial real estate research company prevail in a breach-of-contract dispute in District of Columbia federal court.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.