Indianapolis Social Media Marketing
The FTC Keeps Nomi Narrow, for Now. What Lessons Can Others Learn?
The proposed order provides for very narrow injunctive relief buy 500 instagram followers It simply enjoins Nomi from misrepresenting how consumers can control the collection, use, disclosure or sharing of information collected from them or their devices, buy free instagram followers and from misrepresenting the extent to which consumers will receive notice about such tracking. The majority commissioners, in their statement, were at pains to disclaim any significance of the case with regard to the practice of retail tracking specifically,While the consent order does not require that Nomi provide in-store notice when a store uses its services or offer an in-store opt out, that was not the Commission’s goal in bringing this case. This case is simply about ensuring that when companies promise consumers the ability to make choices, they follow through on those promises.In other words, Nomi is the FTC’s first case involving brick-and-mortar tracking, but the FTC is not yet creating new law: The proposed order does not impose any affirmative notice and choice obligations on industry participants in the retail tracking space. It is not surprising that the commission declined to take such a drastic step with a practice that is still, relatively speaking, in its infancy, and that does not, on its face, involve sensitive personal information
Retail tracking occurs when retailers, or their third-party service how to buy real instagram followers providers, capture and track the movements of consumers in and around stores through their mobile devices, such as through the use of Wi-Fi or beacons, in order, for example, buy instagram followers free trial to better understand store traffic or serve targeted offers. The FTC’s chief technologist recently published detailed comments on the “privacy trade-offs” of retail tracking and the various technologies that companies are using to engage in it. Given the potential lack of transparency around the practice and the corresponding privacy implications, it is not surprising that the FTC decided to address the practice through its Section 5 authority, even if the FTC did so in an indirect fashion.It is also not surprising that the FTC has moved cautiously into this space. The facts of In re Nomi, as alleged in the complaint, are simple. Nomi provided mobile device tracking technology that enabled its clients, brick-and-mortar retailers, to receive analytics reports about aggregate customer traffic patterns