Corporate Transparency Act
This is big reminder for every small business owner.
Under U.S. Corporate Transparency Act (CTA), most corporations, limited liabilty companies and other legal entities, including homeowners’ associations (HOAs), condominium associations, and co-op associations, are required to file Beneficial Ownership Information (BOI) with the U.S. Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) by no later than January 1, 2025. Every U.S. business must register and file this report.
Neural Data: What Illinois Business Owners Need to Know
California enacted an Amendment to the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) that adds neural data to the list of protected personal sensitive information. For Illinois business owners—especially those conducting business in California or utilizing neurotechnology—this development is worth understanding, as it marks another step in the expanding landscape of data privacy laws. Neural data, often collected through non-invasive neurotechnology tools, is now considered sensitive and will be protected under the same stringent requirements as other personal information like genetic, biometric, and geolocation data.
What is Neural Data and Why is it Important?
Insurance Coverage for BIPA violations.
Businesses across Illinois are facing serious challenges in securing insurance coverage for lawsuits brought under the Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA). And a recent decision by the federal court in Chicago – Westfield Insurance Company v. UCAL Systems, Inc. – dealt yet another blow to corporate policyholders. This ruling is just the latest in a series of legal setbacks that make obtaining coverage for BIPA claims under standard Commercial General Liability (CGL) policies an uphill battle.
What Is BIPA, and Why Does It Matter?
Make Sure Non-Disclosure Agreements Don’t Stymie Whistleblowing
Small businesses who enter into non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) with employees need to ensure that those documents clearly delineate that they will not be used to discriminate against those who engage in “whistleblower” activity—or such employers could potentially face unpleasant regulatory consequences.
This was underscored in late July, when the federal Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) issued a “reminder” that the Consumer Financial Protection Act establishing the agency bars employers from either firing or otherwise discriminating against employees who participate in whistleblower activity, assuming the business in question is regulated by the CFPB.
Illinois Human Rights Act Expanded to Include AI Regulation
Recently, Illinois Governor Pritzker signed H.B. 3773 into law, marking a significant expansion of the Illinois Human Rights Act to include specific regulations on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in employment decisions. This move reflects the state’s ongoing commitment to civil rights protection, now extending into the realm of advanced technology.
What Does H.B. 3773 Mean for Your Business?
BIPA Amendment Making Waves in Litigation Trends
The landscape of biometric privacy in Illinois is poised for a significant shift following the recent amendment to the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA). On August 4, 2024, Governor JB Pritzker signed S.B. 2979 into law introducing a crucial modification that could have far-reaching implications for businesses and the ongoing wave of biometric privacy litigation.
Understanding BIPA: A Background
Chicago Paid Leave Ordinance
Employers physically located within the City of Chicago need to be ready as of July 1 to implement the new Chicago Paid Leave and Paid Sick and Safe Leave Ordinance, which stipulates that covered employees can earn up to 40 hours of paid sick leave and 40 hours of other paid leave usable for any reasons per 12-month accrual period.
Covered employees are those who work at least 80 hours within a 120 day period. Immigration status is irrelevant. The benefit year can be defined the same for all employees or entirely individually, and can be tied to the calendar year, fiscal year, tax year, contract year or anniversary date of employment.
AI & Content Creation
Businesses using generative AI programs like ChatGPT to create any content—whether for blogs, websites or other marketing materials, and whether text, visuals, sound or video—need to ensure that they’re not inadvertently using copyrighted materials in the process.
Clearly, the times they are a changing….and businesses need to adapt to the changes. Employers should promulgate messages to their employees and contractors updating their policy manuals to ensure that communications professionals and others crafting content are aware of the risks of using AI-generated materials, which go beyond the possibility that they are “hallucinated” rather than factual—although that’s worth considering, too.
Using Generative AI? Keep Your Secrets
Businesses are finding generative AI programs like ChatGPT useful in functions from financial services to human resources. Although still in its early stages, and far from entirely reliable, the technology is evolving quickly and its tools and practices will continue to develop. The Cisco 2024 Data Privacy Benchmark study found that 79% of businesses say they’re deriving measurable value from generative AI for everything from creating documents to coding.
But this use of generative AI has led to a number of cautions, mostly commonly and loudly about the accuracy of the information that apps like ChatGPT generate—including their tendency to “hallucinate” assertions when they don’t actually have answers.
Lawmakers Amend BIPA
When a class action lawsuit against the fast food chain White Castle teed up what could have been a $17 billion dollar verdict the Illinois Supreme Court decided to “respectfully suggest” that the state legislature revisit and clarify certain provisions of the Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) of 2008.
That act, as originally written, held that employers who did not obtain employees’ permission when using their fingerprints or other biometric information like face scans in the course of their jobs—or who overlooked the same step if collecting similar information from customers—would be on the hook for $1,000 per “negligent” violation or $5,000 per “reckless” or “intentional” violation. For example, if a fingerprint ID system was used to sign in/out at work, each sign-in and each sign-in was a separate violation which could cost the employer $1,000 each time an employee signed in or signed out.
Chicago Business Attorney Blog