Data Privacy Regulations For E-Commerce Platforms

🇪🇺💡Today, the European Data Protection Board published its Recommendations 2/2025 that aim to clarify when #ecommerce providers may lawfully require users to create an account as a condition for accessing offers or completing a purchase. 🔹The #EDPB stresses that mandatory accounts generally expose individuals to unnecessary and disproportionate risks such as expanded identification across sessions, longer retention of personal data, increased attack surfaces through dormant accounts, and greater opportunities for tracking and profiling. 🔹The EDPB reiterates that controllers must identify a valid Article 6 #GDPR legal basis and demonstrate strict necessity for each processing purpose. Account creation is rarely “necessary for contract performance” as one-time purchases can be fulfilled through guest checkout without persistent identifiers. 🔹Even after-sales services, exercising consumer or GDPR rights, or verifying eligibility conditions can be delivered through alternative, less intrusive mechanisms such as temporary links or secure upload forms. By contrast, mandatory accounts may be justified for genuine subscription models that require recurring authenticated access, or for exclusive, closed-membership communities where account-based identification is integral to the service. 🔹Controllers also cannot rely on Article 6(1)(c) GDPR unless a precise legal obligation explicitly requires account creation, which is seldom the case in typical retail or tax record scenarios. Article 6(1)(f) GDPR provides no broad justification either: purposes such as order tracking, operational convenience, customer loyalty, facilitation of future purchases, or fraud prevention fail the strict necessity and balancing tests when equally effective and less intrusive alternatives exist. The Board underlines that users do not reasonably expect compulsory account creation in ordinary purchasing flows, mainly when prompted only at checkout. 🔹Accordingly, the EDPB recommends that e-merchants offer genuine choice: a voluntary account or a guest checkout option. Guest mode better reflects data minimisation, limits retention, reduces security risks, and supports transparency by allowing individuals to understand and control the scope of processing. Additional services such as loyalty programmes, personalised recommendations or facilitated re-orders must rely on an appropriate legal basis (typically consent) and remain clearly separated from the core purchase process. 🔹Overall, requiring user accounts should be lawful only in narrow, well-defined circumstances where controllers can demonstrate strict necessity, such as for subscription-based services. In all other cases, forcing account creation breaches Article 6 GDPR and undermines data protection by design and by default. #privacy

All organizations must comply with evolving privacy regulations and meet customer expectations. Clarity on what needs to be managed is critical. These are three key areas to focus on: 1) Privacy Rights Requests. 2) Consent & Communication Preference 3) Cookie Consent Management. Here are details: 1) Privacy Rights Requests (DSRs) These rights are governed by laws like GDPR (EU), CCPA (US), etc. They empower individuals to control their personal data, including: -- Access, Delete, Correct, Portability. Example: “Send me all data you have about me” -- Restrict Processing, Withdraw Consent. Example: “Pause processing my data for marketing” -- Object to Automated Decisions Example: “Request human review of a loan application instead of relying solely on an algorithm.” -- Opt-Out of Sale/Sharing Example: “Do not sell my data to third parties” (CCPA) -- Limit Sensitive Data Use Example: “Restrict use of my health data for analytics” 2) Consent & Communication Preferences Governed by: GDPR, TCPA (US), CAN-SPAM (US), CASL (Canada), etc These preferences give customers control over following engagement: -- Marketing opt-in/out (email, SMS, calls) Example: “Subscribe to product updates via email” -- Transactional notifications Example: “Receive SMS for delivery status” -- Terms acceptance Example: “Agree to app Terms of Service before use” -- Sensitive data consent Example: “Allow use of biometric data for authentication” -- Frequency & channel preferences Example: “Send me monthly newsletters, not weekly” 3) Cookie Consent Management These are governed by: ePrivacy Directive (EU), GDPR, CPRA, etc They ensure transparency and compliance with tracking technologies: -- Published cookie policy Example: “View detailed cookie categories on website” -- Consent banners (accept/reject/preferences) Example: “Choose analytics cookies only” -- Block non-essential cookies until consent Example: “No ad tracking until user opts in” -- Record and audit consent Example: “Store timestamp of user’s cookie choice” -- Editable/revocable consent Example: “Change cookie settings anytime via footer link” -- Essential cookies exempt Example: “Session cookies for login remain active”

The privacy clock starts now! The Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025 (“Rules”) have been notified today, triggering the phased implementation of the DPDP Act. The first phase brings into force the provisions relating to the Data Protection Board of India, effective immediately, with its head office located in the National Capital Region. The Rules now operationalise the consent and notice framework through clearly articulated requirements. Key aspects include: (a) the obligation for notices to be presented in clear and plain language that can be independently understood; and (b) the broadened scope of the notice, which may now include the “specified purpose or purposes”, potentially enabling organisations to list multiple purposes at the outset rather than a single purpose. On security safeguards, the Rules adopt an “at the minimum” approach. While allowing reasonable flexibility, they prescribe certain baseline safeguards, including encryption, obfuscation, and mechanisms for detecting unauthorised access that all Data Fiduciaries must implement. Breach notification has been strengthened with a two-fold obligation: intimation to both the Data Principal and the Board, “without delay.” Importantly, Data Fiduciaries must also provide the Data Principal with the contact details of a designated point of contact (“POC”) for handling queries. Organisations may need to begin identifying and training such POCs. Data erasure is a central focus. E-commerce entities, online gaming intermediaries, and social media intermediaries that meet the prescribed thresholds must erase users’ personal data within the specified timelines. Notably, Data Fiduciaries are required to retain personal data, associated traffic data, and other logs for a minimum of one year from the date of processing for limited specified purposes. With respect to children’s data, organisations must ensure that parental consent is verifiable. It appears from the illustrations that the Rules suggest two permissible pathways: (a) a child informing the Data Fiduciary that she is a child and also declaring her parent; or (b) a parent identifying herself as the parent of the child. Overall, the Rules fill the operational gaps in the DPDP Act, with substantive provisions slated to take full effect from May 2027. Stakeholders would be well advised to begin preparations now by redesigning consent mechanisms, strengthening internal governance, updating contracts, and operationalising security and erasure workflows, as the steep penalties leave little room for non-compliance. #khaitanCo #dataprotection #TMT #DPDP #DPDPRules

Three states just activated new privacy laws on January 1st. Indiana. Kentucky. Rhode Island. These laws extend frameworks pioneered in California and Virginia, but carry nuances that sellers need to understand. Most DTC brands aren't paying attention. Here's why you should: If you collect email addresses for abandoned cart emails, you're affected. If you run retargeting ads, you're affected. If you use send emails.. you're affected. Rhode Island's law has a broad definition of "sale" that encompasses not only direct monetary transactions but also data sharing with analytics and advertising services. Translation: Sending customer data to Facebook for lookalike audiences might legally count as "selling" their information. A supplement brand got hit with this in Kentucky: They were syncing customer emails to Meta for custom audiences. Under the new law, that's a "sale" of personal data. Now they're required to: - Disclose it in their privacy policy - Offer an opt-out - Maintain records of who opted out - Respond to deletion requests within 45 days They had none of this. They got a notice. They have 30 days to comply or face fines. The fix: Update your privacy policy NOW to include these states. Add an opt-out link in your footer. Audit every tool that touches customer data (Google Analytics, Segment, Klaviyo, TikTok Pixel). For B2B eCommerce operators, even procurement officer profiles on portals or analytics from support chatbots could trigger compliance requirements. This isn't just a B2C problem. If you sell anything and collect any personal data, you're in scope. Most brands will ignore this until they get a letter. Don't be most brands.

Privacy programs that scale are not built around static compliance tasks. They are built to produce evidence by design, grounded in principles that drive consistent decision-making. That evidence is what creates confidence in data practices as regulatory requirements become more operationally specific. The latest CCPA regulations illustrate why this matters. The updated regulations, effective January 1, 2026, are not incremental. Programs built as one-time or check-the-box implementations will find it more difficult to adapt over time, while programs grounded in principles, controls, and continuous regulatory awareness are better positioned to manage change without reactivity becoming the default operating model. If you joined my recent Fireside Chat, these themes will sound familiar. Below are several updates and what they mean for evolving privacy programs. Part 1: Sensitive Personal Information Definition Expanded Personal information of consumers under 16 is now classified as Sensitive Personal Information where the business has actual knowledge of the consumer’s age. Willful disregard of a consumer’s age is deemed actual knowledge. Operational: Update your Privacy Risk Assessments policy and process, Right to Limit processing workflows (including downstream), and update data classification logic and practices. Opt-Out Confirmation will be Mandatory Providing confirmation that an opt-out request has been honored will no longer be optional, including for requests submitted through Global Privacy Control (GPC). Examples include displaying “Opt-Out Request Honored” on a website or using toggles or radio buttons in consumer privacy settings to reflect opt-out status. Operational: Test GPC functionality and review consent manager and cookie banner configurations. Right to Know Scope Expanded Currently, businesses must provide a method for consumers to submit a right to know request. Under the updated regulations, if a business retains personal information for longer than 12 months, that method must allow consumers to request access to personal information collected prior to the 12-month period preceding the request, going back as far as January 1, 2022. Consumers may be given the option to specify a date range for their request or request all personal information the business has collected about them. Operational: Review record retention policies, data maps, understand where you store collection dates, and update data subject rights intake forms and procedures. In upcoming posts, I’ll continue examining the remaining requirements and what they mean in practice.