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
Time to Review Severance Agreement
Employers who have not already done so should comprehensively review their past and present severance agreements to ensure that any non-disparagement and confidentiality clauses contained therein do not run afoul of the National Labor Relations Board’s ruling in a February 2023 case called McLaren Macomb, in which the NLRB significantly—and retroactively—restricted employers’ rights to include such clauses.
Referring to a provision of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) that protects employees’ rights to “engage in protected, concerted activities to address or improve working conditions,” the board wrote that: “a severance agreement is unlawful if its terms have a reasonable tendency to interfere with, or coerce employees in the exercise of their Section 7 rights.”
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.
Non-Competes Now a Nonstarter
This is really big news!
Businesses that have entered into non-compete agreements with current or recently departed employees will need to come up with other ways of achieving the investment-protecting goals those non-competes were designed to accomplish. That’s because the Federal Trade Commission has issued a final rule, which will take after 120 days after publication in the Federal Register, that invalidates current non-competes for most workers and bans new ones for all employees.
Is AI Washing Dirty?
Many people have become familiar with the term “greenwashing,” referring to attempts by a company to cast its products as more environmentally friendly than they are through public relations and marketing “spin” efforts.
Now comes the concept of “AI-washing,” in which companies exaggerate the degree to which or ways in which their products and services are powered by artificial intelligence, in order to gain a real or perceived competitive advantage. In addition to potentially misleading consumers and harming investors, this can break U.S. securities law, according to Gary Gensler, chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission.
How Can Generative AI Assist Your Business?
What is generative artificial intelligence, embedded in applications such as ChatGPT? How could it help your business? What pitfalls should you avoid. What policies should you craft around it?
This is no longer science fiction. AI has become a reality and every business will be impacted by its use and application and your business must get on board with dealing with it and using it.
Antitrust Lawsuit
National Association of Realtors
Decades-old norms regarding Realtor commissions and other policies surrounding home buying and selling have been swept away by the March 15 court settlement between the National Association of Realtors and groups of homeowners who filed suit against the realtors’ group arguing that home buyers should pay their agents’ commissions directly and – most significantly – be able to negotiate that fee.
As a result of the settlement – which is still subject to the approval of the judge overseeing the case – the standard 6% commission on a home sale, heretofore split between the buyers’ and sellers’ agent, will be replaced with a system whereby prospective buyers can shop around for a lower rate and brokers can advertise those rates, even charging flat fees if they wish.
