PANOPTICON information broker
page 3 / 4
In the US, individuals generally cannot find out what data a broker holds on them, how a broker got it, or how it is used. There is no federal law that permits or enables consumers to see, make corrections to, or opt out of data compiled by brokers.
Files on individuals are generally sold in lists; examples cited in testimony to the U.S. Congress include lists of rape survivors, seniors with dementia, financially vulnerable people, people with HIV, police officers (by home address), alcoholics, and people with erectile dysfunction.
=== Calls for regulation in the US ===
A 2007 University of California study, after requesting and analyzing information-sharing practices at 86 companies, found many operating under an opt-out model that it described as inconsistent with consumer expectations, and recommended that the California state legislature require companies to disclose their information-sharing policies using clear, unambiguous language, and consider creating a centralized, user-friendly method for consumers to opt out of information-sharing.
The proposed US Data Accountability and Trust Act (introduced in 2009) contained a number of requirements for auditing and verification of accuracy of data held by information brokers, and additional measures in the case of a security breach. The bill also gave identified individuals the means and opportunity to review and correct the data held that related to them. It passed through the United States House of Representatives in the 111th United States Congress, but failed to pass the United States Senate. It was revived by the 112th United States Congress in 2011 as H.R. 1707., but died after being referred to committee. The bill was first introduced by Rep. Bobby Rush [D-IL1] on 30 April 2009, H.R. 2221.
In 2009, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission had recommended the United States Congress develop legislation enabling consumers to see the information that data brokers hold about them, a recommendation it renewed in subsequent reports in 2012 and 2014. In 2013, the U.S. Government Accountability Office also called for Congress to consider legislation.
In October 2019, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed into action statute AB 1202. This bill "would require data brokers to register with, and provide certain information to, the Attorney General. The bill would define a data broker as a business that knowingly collects and sells to third parties the personal information of a consumer with whom the business does not have a direct relationship, subject to specified exceptions". This law was created to safeguard against the "cloak of invisibility" (unregistered, unregulated, untracked information broker) that previous data brokers roamed in. It was also meant to regulate the purchasing of data in commercial third party buyers, and tracks the data brokers information trades.
Due to the interest in federal regulation, data broker firms have lobbied and spent $29 million in the year 2020.
In 2025, Zhou Shuai and Yin Kecheng, two China-based data brokers wanted by the FBI were accused by the United States Department of State of selling sensitive American data to China’s Ministry of Public Security (MPS).
=== Criticisms, consumer rights and breaches ===
A United States Senate Committee in 2013 published A Review of the Data Broker Industry: Collection, Use, and Sale of Consumer Data for Marketing Purposes. It states that "Today, a wide range of companies known as 'data brokers' collect and maintain data on hundreds of millions of consumers, which they analyze, package, and sell generally without consumer permission or input." Their main findings were that:
Data brokers collect a huge volume of detailed information on hundreds of millions of consumers.
Data brokers sell products that identify financially vulnerable consumers.
Data broker products provide information about consumer offline behavior to tailor online outreach by marketers.
Data brokers operate behind a veil of secrecy.
The information produced by data brokers has been criticized for enabling discrimination in pricing, services and opportunities. For example, a May 2014 White House report found that web searches that included black-seeming first names such as Jermaine were more likely to result in ads being displayed that include the word "arrest," compared with web searches including white-seeming first names such as Geoffrey.
An Online Information Broker FAQ is published by Privacy Rights Clearinghouse (PRC), a nonprofit consumer organization in the United States. PRC also maintains a list of information brokers, with links to their privacy policies, terms of service, and opt-out provisions.
Data brokers have also faced legal charges for security breaches due to poor data security practices.
== Professional associations ==
The Association of Independent Information Professionals (AIIP) is a professional association based in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, with members from 20 countries worldwide, representing both primary and secondary researchers.