IAPP

For everyone who wanted to know the conclusion to the AI Act omnibus story… it’s not over yet… For today’s IAPP AI Governance Dashboard I wrote an article about what happened with the trilogue process, how it didn’t go according to plan, and what AI Governance professionals should do to prepare for compliance of the Act in a period of indecision - https://lnkd.in/eaVtUeyX

Level up your understanding of privacy in technology with IAPP’s live online training! 🗓️ 4, 6, 11 & 13 May 2026 | ⏰ 12:00–3:30 PM EDT Expert-led. Collaborative. Learn from anywhere. 👉 Learn more here: https://bit.ly/4dbnRsh

🎤 Another standout voice is joining the AIGG mainstage… Lucilla Sioli, Director of the EU AI Office, DG Connect, at the European Commission, will take the keynote stage at #IAPPAIGG26, bringing a front-row perspective on Europe’s approach to AI governance, regulation, and deployment. Register now to join us in Dublin: https://bit.ly/4cAoXxO

Just ONE day away 🎊 Don't miss your chance to join Adam Ford, Daimhin Warner, and Tim de Sousa conversation as they discuss what they expect to be key themes in privacy, AI governance, and digital responsibility during Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand's Privacy Awareness Weeks 2026. 🎙️ Join our LinkedIn Live tomorrow, 30 April at 11:00 a.m. NZST/9:00 a.m. AEST: https://bit.ly/3P6aTD1

Do companies store your location history in "glass-front storage units" for the government to peer into? That's one analogy the U.S. Supreme Court Justices grappled with yesterday during oral arguments in Chatrie v. United States, a case that could re-define the rules around the use of geofence warrants. You can read IAPP's reporting on the arguments here: https://lnkd.in/eCk4DpdZ (H/t to my brilliant friends Stacey Gray and Katelyn Ringrose for helping me refine this explanation.) Why glass storage units? The analogy comes up as a way of breaking down the three procedural steps of a geofence warrant, with litigants arguing about the scope and timing of the government searches that occur when a third-party like Google filters user accounts for certain types of personal data (in this case geolocation). National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers argues that searches of individual Google Accounts would require a search warrant, possibly for each account, in the same way the government can't show up to a storage facility and demand all doors be opened because one might have evidence of a crime contained, even if the storage unit owner (like Google's Location History) has the ability to enter each separate unit.  Step 1 law enforcement request: peering through the glass walls, do any storage units appear to contain guns? (Which devices were present within this geofence during a set time?) Step 2 request: taking a closer look at those glass storage units that contain guns, can we narrow the search by focusing on just those that also have ammunition, or some other factor? (Of the devices present in the geofence, which meet additional screening criteria *required by Google* to narrow the government's search?) Step 3 request: who rented those storage units that are holding guns and ammunition? (Provide the data from individuals / devices meeting all of the narrowed search parameters.)

Want to embed privacy protection while developing your next product? Amjad Afanah joined us at #IAPPSummit26 to share how HoundDog.ai can help teams detect privacy risks before incidents occur. 🎧 Tune in to hear how HoundDog.ai can enable privacy by design and proactive AI governance ⬇️

We’re officially ONE week out from IAPP Canada Symposium 2026 in Toronto! 🍁 This year’s program brings timely conversations to the forefront, from First Nations data governance and evolving privacy laws to the role of AI in healthcare, the use of biometric surveillance, and practical approaches to cybersecurity. If you’re a digital responsibility professional looking to deepen your understanding of Canada’s regulatory landscape and emerging challenges, this is an event you won’t want to miss. We hope to see you there—save your spot now: https://bit.ly/4b7T3Iu

Before you unplug this weekend, catch up on the key global privacy and AI headlines worth knowing: 🌍 A view from Brussels: Simplification? Barely. Uncertainty? For Sure, by Isabelle Roccia (CIPP/E): https://bit.ly/41WebM1 🌏 Notes from the Asia-Pacific region: China signals pragmatic data compliance approach for SMEs, by Barbara Li: https://bit.ly/4vNmmI2 🌎 A view from DC: Congress’ FISA Section 702 stalemate reveals a rocky road ahead, by Cobun Zweifel-Keegan, J.D., CIPP/US, CIPM: https://bit.ly/4vQFCVg 🌎 Notes from the IAPP Canada: The IAPP Canada Symposium 2026 is almost here, by Kris Klein: https://bit.ly/41WfbQh To get these headlines delivered right to your inbox, subscribe to our Daily Dashboard: https://bit.ly/49P3QVt 📥

NYC, we’re coming your way! 🗽🍎 Over two days, you’ll dive into real-world AI governance challenges, gain practical tools from IAPP experts, and connect with peers shaping responsible AI across industries. 📍 New York City 📅 18–19 May 🎓 AI Governance Professional (AIGP) — In Person Training 🔗 Learn more & register: https://bit.ly/4mN5fSN

“The United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments Tuesday in cases brought by two major telecommunications companies challenging million-dollar fines imposed by the Federal Communications Commission over alleged failures to protect consumers' personal location data.” Alexander LaCasse takes a closer look at the case and its broader privacy implications in “U.S. Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments on FCC’s Privacy Fines of Major Telecoms,” examining challenges from AT&T and Verizon over more than $100 million in FCC enforcement actions. 🔗 https://bit.ly/4cqyzei