Two people should not be paying different prices for the same product based on the collection of their personal data. 

Filing in Yeh v. Barrington Pacific, LLC urges the Court of Appeal to reject federal-style standing hurdles that would weaken Californians’ consumer-privacy rights under the Investigative Consumer Reporting Agencies Act (ICRAA). Los...

California's top privacy agency has gutted regs surrounding data and algorithmic decisions.

AB 446, which proposes a ban on surveillance pricing, advances to the Assembly Judiciary Committee.

Honda settled allegations that it failed to disclose data agreements with third parties, and requested more personal information than necessary when people tried to exercise privacy rights with the company. 

Surveillance Pricing is when people are charged different prices for the same product based on personal data. It’s likely everywhere, and it’s hard to spot. With AB 446, proposed by Assemblymember Chris Ward, the practice of surveillance pricing would be banned.

Companies really are trying to get inside your head thanks to mountains of personal data to predict your desires and prey on your impulses.

Corporations use surveillance to charge individualized prices based on a person’s data and assumptions on their eagerness to pay for an item.

California's privacy agency is conducting a public sweep of data brokers, who collect and sell a lot of personal data.

Newsom vetoed several tech bills.