https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/06/californias-corporate-cover-act-privacy-nightmare Skip to main content * About + Contact + Press + People + Opportunities + EFF's 35th Anniversary * Issues + Free Speech + Privacy + Creativity and Innovation + Transparency + International + Security * Our Work + Deeplinks Blog + Press Releases + Events + Legal Cases + Whitepapers + Podcast + Annual Reports * Take Action + Action Center + Electronic Frontier Alliance + Volunteer * Tools + Privacy Badger + Surveillance Self-Defense + Certbot + Atlas of Surveillance + Cover Your Tracks + Street Level Surveillance + apkeep * Donate + Donate to EFF + Giving Societies + Shop + Sponsorships + Other Ways to Give + Membership FAQ * Donate + Donate to EFF + Shop + Other Ways to Give * Search form Search [ ] --------------------------------------------------------------------- Email updates on news, actions, and events in your area. Join EFF Lists * Copyright (CC BY) * Trademark * Privacy Policy * Thanks Electronic Frontier Foundation Donate [member-202] [member-202] Electronic Frontier Foundation * About + Contact + Press + People + Opportunities + EFF's 35th Anniversary * Issues + Free Speech + Privacy + Creativity and Innovation + Transparency + International + Security * Our Work + Deeplinks Blog + Press Releases + Events + Legal Cases + Whitepapers + Podcast + Annual Reports * Take Action + Action Center + Electronic Frontier Alliance + Volunteer * Tools + Privacy Badger + Surveillance Self-Defense + Certbot + Atlas of Surveillance + Cover Your Tracks + Street Level Surveillance + apkeep * Donate + Donate to EFF + Giving Societies + Shop + Sponsorships + Other Ways to Give + Membership FAQ * Donate + Donate to EFF + Shop + Other Ways to Give * Search form Search [ ] California's Corporate Cover-Up Act Is a Privacy Nightmare DEEPLINKS BLOG By Rindala Alajaji June 25, 2025 California Sunshine California's Corporate Cover-Up Act Is a Privacy Nightmare Share It Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Copy link California Sunshine California lawmakers are pushing one of the most dangerous privacy rollbacks we've seen in years. S.B. 690, what we're calling the Corporate Cover-Up Act, is a brazen attempt to let corporations spy on us in secret, gutting long-standing protections without a shred of accountability. The Corporate Cover-Up Act is a massive carve-out that would gut California's Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA) and give Big Tech and data brokers a green light to spy on us without consent for just about any reason. If passed, S.B. 690 would let companies secretly record your clicks, calls, and behavior online--then share or sell that data with whomever they'd like, all under the banner of a "commercial business purpose." Simply put, The Corporate Cover-Up Act (S.B. 690) is a blatant attack on digital privacy, and is written to eviscerate long-standing privacy laws and legal safeguards Californians rely on. If passed, it would: * Gut California's Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA)--a law that protects us from being secretly recorded or monitored * Legalize corporate wiretaps, allowing companies to intercept real-time clicks, calls, and communications * Authorize pen registers and trap-and-trace tools, which track who you talk to, when, and how--without consent * Let companies use all of this surveillance data for "commercial business purposes"--with zero notice and no legal consequences This isn't a small fix. It's a sweeping rollback of hard-won privacy protections--the kind that helped expose serious abuses by companies like Facebook, Google, and Oracle. TAKE ACTION You Can't Opt Out of Surveillance You Don't Know Is Happening Proponents of The Corporate Cover-Up Act claim it's just a "clarification" to align CIPA with the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA). That's misleading. The truth is, CIPA and CCPA don't conflict. CIPA stops secret surveillance. The CCPA governs how data is used after it's collected, such as through the right to opt out of your data being shared. You can't opt out of being spied on if you're never told it's happening in the first place. Once companies collect your data under S.B. 690, they can: * Sell it to data brokers * Share it with immigration enforcement or other government agencies * Use it to against abortion seekers, LGBTQ+ people, workers, and protesters, and * Retain it indefinitely for profiling ...with no consent; no transparency; and no recourse. The Communities Most at Risk This bill isn't just a tech policy misstep. It's a civil rights disaster. If passed, S.B. 690 will put the most vulnerable people in California directly in harm's way: * Immigrants, who may be tracked and targeted by ICE * LGBTQ+ individuals, who could be outed or monitored without their knowledge * Abortion seekers, who could have location or communications data used against them * Protesters and workers, who rely on private conversations to organize safely The message this bill sends is clear: corporate profits come before your privacy. We Must Act Now S.B. 690 isn't just a bad tech bill--it's a dangerous precedent. It tells every corporation: Go ahead and spy on your consumers--we've got your back. Californians deserve better. If you live in California, now is the time to call your lawmakers and demand they vote NO on the Corporate Cover-Up Act. TAKE ACTION Spread the word, amplify the message, and help stop this attack on privacy before it becomes law. Related Issues Privacy Big Tech Share It Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Copy link Join EFF Lists Discover more. Email updates on news, actions, events in your area, and more. Email Address [ ] Postal Code (optional) [ ] Anti-spam question: Enter the three-letter abbreviation for Electronic Frontier Foundation: [ ] Don't fill out this field (required) [ ] [Submit] Thanks, you're awesome! Please check your email for a confirmation link. Oops something is broken right now, please try again later. Related Updates [icon-2019-privacy] Deeplinks Blog by Mario Trujillo, Hayley Tsukayama | June 24, 2025 Why Are Hundreds of Data Brokers Not Registering with States? Hundreds of data brokers have not registered with state consumer protection agencies. A new analysis by Privacy Rights Clearinghouse (PRC) and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) reveals that many data brokers registered in one state aren't registered in others. A person holding a megaphone that another person speaks through Deeplinks Blog by Veridiana Alimonti | June 24, 2025 Major Setback for Intermediary Liability in Brazil: Risks and Blind Spots This is the third post of a series about internet intermediary liability in Brazil. Our first post gives an overview of Brazil's current internet intermediary liability regime, set out in a law known as "Marco Civil da Internet," the context of its approval in 2014, and the beginning... A person holding a megaphone that another person speaks through Deeplinks Blog by Veridiana Alimonti | June 24, 2025 Major Setback for Intermediary Liability in Brazil: How Did We Get Here? This is the second post of a series about intermediary liability in Brazil. Our first post gives an overview of Brazil's current intermediary liability regime, the context of its approval in 2014, and the beginning of the Supreme Court's analysis of such regime in November 2024. Our third... [icon-2019-privacy] Deeplinks Blog by Tori Noble | June 23, 2025 Copyright Cases Should Not Threaten Chatbot Users' Privacy Like users of all technologies, ChatGPT users deserve the right to delete their personal data. Nineteen U.S. States, the European Union, and a host of other countries already protect users' right to delete. For years, OpenAI gave users the option to delete their conversations with ChatGPT, rather than let their... [database-1] Deeplinks Blog by Svea Windwehr | June 23, 2025 EFF to European Commission: Don't Resurrect Illegal Data Retention Mandates The mandatory retention of metadata is an evergreen of European digital policy. Despite a number of rulings by Europe's highest court, confirming again and again the incompatibility of general and indiscriminate data retention mandates with European fundamental rights, the European Commission is taking major... A woman being watched behind a one-way mirror Deeplinks Blog by Lena Cohen, Rory Mir | June 20, 2025 Protect Yourself From Meta's Latest Attack on Privacy The best way to stop this cycle of invasive tracking techniques and patchwork fixes is to ban online behavioral advertising. This would end the practice of targeting ads based on your online activity, removing the primary incentive for companies to track and share your personal data. We need strong federal... An orange tabby cat with yellow lightning markings in a blue spacesuit, wearing a jetpack, flying through pink and purple space. There are planets in the sky with colors representing a variety of pride flags. Deeplinks Blog by Paige Collings | June 18, 2025 LGBT Q&A: Your Online Speech and Privacy Questions, Answered This year, like almost all years before, LGBTQ+ Pride month is taking place at a time of burgeoning anti-LGBTQ+ violence, harassment, and criticism. Lawmakers and regulators are passing legislation restricting freedom of expression and privacy for LGBTQ+ individuals and fueling offline intolerance. Online platforms are also complicit in... [laptop-spying_0] Deeplinks Blog by Jillian C. York | June 12, 2025 A New Digital Dawn for Syrian Tech Users U.S. sanctions on Syria have for several decades not only restricted trade and financial transactions, they've also severely limited Syrians' access to digital technology. Syrians have been locked out of the global internet economy--stifling innovation, education, and entrepreneurship. [keys-crossed-pink-starburst_0] Deeplinks Blog by India McKinney | June 10, 2025 Oppose STOP CSAM: Protecting Kids Shouldn't Mean Breaking the Tools That Keep Us Safe A Senate bill re-introduced this week threatens security and free speech on the internet. EFF urges Congress to reject the STOP CSAM Act of 2025 (S. 1829), which would undermine services offering end-to-end encryption and force internet companies to take down lawful user content. TAKE... An eye with the OPM logo in the iris, green digital background Press Release | June 9, 2025 Privacy Victory! Judge Grants Preliminary Injunction in OPM/DOGE Lawsuit In a victory for personal privacy, a New York federal district court judge today granted a preliminary injunction in a lawsuit challenging the U.S. Office of Personnel Management's (OPM) disclosure of records to DOGE and its agents. Discover more. Email updates on news, actions, events in your area, and more. Email Address [ ] Postal Code (optional) [ ] Anti-spam question: Enter the three-letter abbreviation for Electronic Frontier Foundation: [ ] Don't fill out this field (required) [ ] [Submit] Thanks, you're awesome! Please check your email for a confirmation link. Oops something is broken right now, please try again later. Share It Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Copy link Related Issues Privacy Big Tech Back to top EFF Home Follow EFF: * mastodon * facebook * instagram * x * Blue Sky * youtube * flicker * linkedin * tiktok * threads Check out our 4-star rating on Charity Navigator. Contact * General * Legal * Security * Membership * Press About * Calendar * Volunteer * Victories * History * Internships * Jobs * Staff * Diversity & Inclusion Issues * Free Speech * Privacy * Creativity & Innovation * Transparency * International * Security Updates * Blog * Press Releases * Events * Legal Cases * Whitepapers * EFFector Newsletter Press * Press Contact Donate * Join or Renew Membership Online * One-Time Donation Online * Giving Societies * Corporate Giving and Sponsorship * Shop * Other Ways to Give * Copyright (CC BY) * Trademark * Privacy Policy * Thanks JavaScript license information *