In Idaho, the primary legislation governing data privacy and security is the Idaho Consumer Data Protection Act (ICDPA). This act establishes specific rights for consumers regarding their personal data and imposes obligations on businesses that collect and process this data. A key aspect of the ICDPA is the concept of a “controller” and a “processor.” A controller is an entity that determines the purposes and means of processing personal data, while a processor is an entity that processes personal data on behalf of a controller. The ICDPA outlines several consumer rights, including the right to access, correct, delete, and opt-out of the sale of personal data. It also requires controllers to provide clear and accessible privacy notices, obtain consent for certain processing activities, and implement reasonable security measures to protect personal data. When a business operates in Idaho and meets the thresholds defined by the ICDPA, it must comply with these provisions. For instance, if a business controls or processes the personal data of at least 100,000 Idaho consumers or controls or processes the personal data of at least 50,000 Idaho consumers and derives more than 25% of its gross revenue from the sale of personal data, it falls under the scope of the act. The question tests the understanding of when a business’s activities would trigger the application of the Idaho Consumer Data Protection Act, focusing on the quantitative thresholds for consumer data processing and revenue derived from data sales. The correct answer identifies the scenario that precisely aligns with these statutory triggers, demonstrating a nuanced understanding of the act’s applicability.

The Idaho Consumer Data Protection Act (ICDPA) grants consumers the right to opt out of the sale of their personal data. Idaho law defines “sale” broadly to include exchanges for monetary or other valuable consideration, regardless of whether a monetary payment is made. This definition is crucial because it captures situations where data is shared for targeted advertising or other benefits that constitute valuable consideration. For instance, if a company in Idaho shares a customer’s browsing history with a third-party analytics firm in exchange for detailed market insights that the firm would otherwise charge for, this transaction would likely be considered a “sale” under the ICDPA. The law requires controllers to provide a clear mechanism for consumers to opt out of such sales. The threshold for applicability is a business that controls or processes the personal data of at least 100,000 Idaho consumers or controls or processes the personal data of at least 100,000 Idaho consumers and derives more than 50% of its gross revenue from selling personal data. Therefore, a business meeting these thresholds and engaging in such data exchanges must honor opt-out requests related to the sale of personal data.

The Idaho Consumer Protection Act (ICPA), specifically Idaho Code § 48-601 et seq., broadly prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices in commerce. While Idaho does not have a comprehensive data privacy law akin to California’s CCPA/CPRA or Washington’s CPA, the ICPA can be invoked to address certain data privacy harms if they involve deceptive or unfair practices. For instance, a business that misrepresents its data security measures or fails to disclose material aspects of its data collection and sharing practices could be found in violation of the ICPA. The core of the ICPA’s application to data privacy lies in whether the conduct is considered “unfair” or “deceptive.” Deceptive practices typically involve misrepresentation or omission of material facts likely to mislead a reasonable consumer. Unfair practices are those that cause or are likely to cause substantial injury to consumers, which is not reasonably avoidable by consumers themselves, and not outweighed by countervailing benefits to consumers or to competition. In the context of data privacy, a company’s failure to implement reasonable security measures, if advertised or implied to be in place, could be considered deceptive. Furthermore, if a company collects sensitive personal information and then experiences a breach due to grossly inadequate security, and this failure to secure the data is not adequately disclosed or addressed, it could potentially be viewed as an unfair practice under the ICPA, especially if it leads to substantial harm like identity theft or financial loss, and consumers could not reasonably avoid this harm. However, the ICPA is a general consumer protection statute, and its application to data privacy is often indirect and fact-specific, relying on established principles of unfair and deceptive trade practices rather than explicit data privacy mandates. The absence of specific data breach notification requirements in Idaho law, for example, means that while a company might not be violating a direct data privacy statute, its overall conduct regarding data handling could still be scrutinized under the broader ICPA if it involves misleading consumers or causing unfair harm. The question asks about the primary statutory framework in Idaho that can be used to address unfair or deceptive practices related to data handling, even in the absence of a specific comprehensive data privacy law. The Idaho Consumer Protection Act is precisely this framework, as it provides a general prohibition against such conduct in commerce.

Idaho’s consumer data privacy framework, particularly the Idaho Consumer Data Privacy Act (ICDPA), grants consumers specific rights regarding their personal data. A key aspect of this legislation is the right to opt-out of the sale of personal data and the processing of personal data for targeted advertising or profiling. When a consumer exercises this right, the controller must cease such processing. The ICDPA defines “sale” broadly to include disclosing personal data for monetary or other valuable consideration. The law also requires controllers to provide clear notice about data collection and processing practices, and to honor consumer requests within a specified timeframe, typically 45 days, with a possible extension. Controllers must also implement reasonable security measures to protect personal data. The law applies to entities that conduct business in Idaho or produce goods or services targeted to Idaho residents and meet certain thresholds related to annual revenue and the volume of personal data processed. The enforcement of the ICDPA is primarily handled by the Idaho Attorney General, who can seek statutory damages and injunctive relief for violations. Understanding the scope of “sale” and the specific opt-out mechanisms is crucial for compliance.

The Idaho Consumer Data Protection Act (ICDPA) defines a “controller” as a natural person or legal entity that alone or jointly with others determines the purposes and means of processing personal data. The ICDPA outlines specific obligations for controllers regarding the collection, processing, and safeguarding of consumer personal data. These obligations include providing clear privacy notices, honoring consumer rights such as access and deletion, and implementing reasonable security measures. The act also specifies thresholds for applicability based on the volume of personal data processed and revenue generated. For a business operating within Idaho, understanding its role as either a controller or processor is fundamental to complying with the ICDPA’s requirements. A processor, in contrast, acts on behalf of a controller and does not independently determine the purposes or means of processing. Therefore, the entity making decisions about why and how personal data is processed is the controller.

The Idaho Consumer Data Protection Act (ICDPA) defines a “business” as an entity that conducts business in Idaho or produces products or services targeted to residents of Idaho and meets certain thresholds. These thresholds relate to the amount of personal data controlled or processed and the annual revenue derived from that data. Specifically, a business is subject to the ICDPA if, during the preceding calendar year, it controlled or processed the personal data of at least 100,000 Idaho consumers, or controlled or processed the personal data of at least 100,000 Idaho consumers and derived more than 50% of its gross revenue from selling personal data of Idaho consumers or deriving revenue from that data. The law also includes a revenue threshold of $50 million or more. The question asks about the threshold for the number of Idaho consumers whose personal data a business must control or process to be subject to the ICDPA, excluding the revenue or data sale derivation percentage. Based on the ICDPA, the primary threshold for the volume of consumer data processed is 100,000 Idaho consumers. This is distinct from the secondary threshold which also requires deriving a majority of gross revenue from selling personal data. The question specifically isolates the consumer data volume metric.

Idaho’s data privacy landscape, while not as comprehensive as some other states like California, establishes specific requirements for certain entities and data types. The Idaho Consumer Protection Act (ICPA) and other related statutes govern various aspects of data handling and consumer rights. A key consideration for businesses operating in Idaho is understanding when a data breach notification is triggered. Idaho Code § 48-1806 outlines the obligation to notify affected individuals in the event of an unauthorized acquisition of computerized personal information. This notification is generally required if the acquisition is reasonably believed to have resulted in or is likely to result in, the acquisition of personal information by an unauthorized person. The law defines “personal information” broadly to include an individual’s name in combination with a social security number, driver’s license number, or financial account number. It also includes biometric data. The notification must be made without unreasonable delay and must include specific details about the breach, the type of information compromised, and steps individuals can take to protect themselves. Crucially, the law includes an exception if the entity implements a data security program that includes measures to protect the confidentiality of personal information and the unauthorized acquisition was incidental and the personal information was not subject to further unauthorized acquisition. This exception is often interpreted to apply when data is encrypted or otherwise rendered unintelligible. The threshold for notification is not tied to a specific number of individuals or a monetary loss, but rather to the nature of the data compromised and the likelihood of harm. Therefore, even a single compromised record containing sensitive personal information can trigger the notification requirement if the conditions are met. The core principle is to inform individuals when their sensitive personal data has been exposed to unauthorized access, enabling them to mitigate potential harm.

Idaho’s approach to data privacy, particularly concerning the sale of personal information, is primarily shaped by the Idaho Consumer Data Protection Act (ICDPA). The ICDPA, like many state privacy laws, grants consumers rights regarding their personal data. A key aspect is the right to opt-out of the sale of personal information. The definition of “sale” under the ICDPA is broad, encompassing the exchange of personal information for monetary consideration or other valuable consideration. However, the law specifies certain exclusions from what constitutes a sale. These exclusions are crucial for businesses to understand to ensure compliance. For instance, sharing data with a processor to provide a service to the consumer, sharing data with affiliates for consistent branding or services, or sharing data as part of a merger or acquisition are generally not considered sales. The ICDPA also focuses on transparency, requiring controllers to provide clear privacy notices and mechanisms for consumers to exercise their rights. When evaluating whether a specific data transaction constitutes a “sale” under Idaho law, one must meticulously examine the nature of the exchange, the purpose of the data transfer, and whether it falls within any of the statutory exclusions. The law aims to provide consumers with control over their data, especially when it is monetized, without unduly burdening legitimate business operations that do not involve the commercial exploitation of personal information in a manner that compromises consumer privacy. Therefore, understanding the nuances of the definition of “sale” and its exceptions is paramount for compliance.

The Idaho Consumer Data Protection Act (ICDPA) defines a “business” as an entity that conducts business in Idaho or produces products or services targeted to residents of Idaho and that meets certain thresholds. These thresholds are based on controlling or processing the personal data of a specific number of Idaho consumers. For the purpose of determining applicability, the ICDPA specifies that a business must control or process the personal data of at least 100,000 Idaho consumers or control or process the personal data of at least 25,000 Idaho consumers and derive more than 50% of its gross revenue from selling personal data. The question asks for the threshold related to deriving revenue from selling data. Therefore, the correct threshold is 25,000 consumers and deriving more than 50% of gross revenue from selling personal data. This law, like many US state privacy laws, aims to provide consumers with rights regarding their personal information and places obligations on businesses that handle this data, focusing on transparency, consent, and security. The definition of “consumer” is also critical, referring to a resident of Idaho acting in a personal, not commercial or employment, context. The act’s scope is limited to specific types of entities and data processing activities, excluding government agencies, non-profits, and certain types of data like protected health information covered by HIPAA.

The Idaho Consumer Data Protection Act (ICDPA) defines a “business” as an entity that conducts business in Idaho or produces products or services targeted to Idaho residents and meets certain thresholds. Specifically, a business is considered a controller if it alone or jointly with others determines the purposes and means of processing personal data. The threshold for applicability is met if the business processes personal data of at least 100,000 Idaho consumers or controls or processes personal data of at least 25,000 Idaho consumers and derives more than 50% of its gross revenue from selling personal data or controlling personal data. The question asks about the threshold for a business to be considered a “controller” under the ICDPA. The ICDPA does not define a separate threshold specifically for being a “controller” versus being a “business” that is subject to the act. Instead, the thresholds mentioned above define when a business is subject to the act, and if it meets these thresholds and determines the purposes and means of processing, it acts as a controller. Therefore, the correct understanding is that the thresholds for applicability are the same for a business to be considered subject to the act and, by extension, to be acting as a controller if it makes those processing decisions. The ICDPA’s thresholds are designed to capture entities that have a significant impact on Idaho consumers’ data. The law focuses on the volume of data processed or the revenue derived from data sales to determine its scope, reflecting a common approach in state privacy legislation to balance consumer protection with the operational realities of businesses.

The Idaho Consumer Data Protection Act (ICDPA) grants consumers rights regarding their personal data, including the right to opt-out of the sale of personal data and targeted advertising. When a controller receives a request to opt-out of sale or targeted advertising, they must comply within 15 business days of receiving the request. This period can be extended by an additional 15 business days if the controller informs the consumer of the extension and the reason for it. Therefore, the maximum permissible time to comply with such a request, including any permissible extension, is 30 business days. The ICDPA defines “sale” broadly, encompassing the exchange of personal data for monetary or other valuable consideration. The law also requires controllers to provide clear notice about their data processing activities and consumer rights. Understanding these timelines and definitions is crucial for businesses operating in Idaho to ensure compliance and avoid potential penalties. The act’s provisions are designed to enhance transparency and consumer control over personal information.

The Idaho Consumer Data Protection Act (ICDPA) grants consumers the right to opt-out of the sale of personal data. The definition of “sale” under the ICDPA is broad and includes exchanges for monetary or other valuable consideration. However, the ICDPA also specifies certain exclusions from the definition of sale. Specifically, it states that “sale” does not include: (1) disclosing personal data to a processor that processes the data on behalf of the controller; (2) disclosing personal data to a third party for the purpose of providing a product or service requested by the consumer; (3) disclosing personal data to a third party with whom the consumer has a direct relationship; (4) disclosing personal data to a third party if the consumer has been shown that the disclosure will occur and has had the opportunity to opt-out of that specific disclosure; (5) disclosing personal data to a parent, subsidiary, or affiliate of the controller; (6) disclosing personal data to a third party to whom the personal data has been disclosed if the third party is subject to similar privacy restrictions; (7) disclosing personal data to a third party as part of a merger, acquisition, or other transaction involving the assets of the controller; or (8) disclosing personal data to a third party for purposes of product development and improvement. In the scenario presented, a data broker in Idaho, “Gem State Data Analytics,” shares a list of Idaho residents’ contact information with a marketing firm, “Boise Direct Mailers,” in exchange for a fee. Boise Direct Mailers intends to use this list for targeted advertising campaigns for its clients. This exchange clearly falls under the definition of a “sale” as it involves the transfer of personal data for valuable consideration. The ICDPA’s opt-out provision is triggered by such sales. Therefore, Gem State Data Analytics must honor an Idaho consumer’s request to opt-out of this specific sale of their personal data. The other options are incorrect because they do not accurately reflect the ICDPA’s provisions regarding the definition of sale and opt-out rights. For instance, disclosing data to a processor acting on behalf of the controller (an exclusion) or disclosing data for a consumer-requested product or service (another exclusion) are not applicable here. The scenario does not involve a consumer’s direct relationship with the marketing firm, nor does it fit the other enumerated exclusions.

The Idaho Consumer Data Protection Act (ICDPA) outlines specific requirements for businesses concerning the processing of personal data. A key aspect is the definition of a “controller,” which is an entity that alone or jointly with others determines the purposes and means of processing personal data. The act also specifies thresholds for applicability based on revenue and the volume of personal data processed. For a business to be subject to the ICDPA, it must conduct business in Idaho or produce goods or services targeted to Idaho residents, and meet certain processing thresholds. These thresholds are: (1) having annual revenue of $25 million or more, or (2) controlling or processing the personal data of 100,000 or more Idaho consumers, or (3) controlling or processing the personal data of 25,000 or more Idaho consumers and deriving more than 25% of its annual gross revenue from selling personal data of Idaho consumers. In the given scenario, “Innovate Solutions Inc.” meets the revenue threshold of $30 million annually, which directly triggers the applicability of the ICDPA, irrespective of the number of consumers whose data they process or the revenue derived from selling data. Therefore, the primary basis for Innovate Solutions Inc.’s obligation under the ICDPA is its annual revenue.

Idaho law, specifically Idaho Code Title 48, Chapter 18, addresses data breach notification requirements. The core principle is that a breach of the security of computerized data that compromises or is reasonably believed to have compromised the personal information of an Idaho resident necessitates notification. Personal information is defined broadly to include a first name or first initial and last name in combination with any one or more of the following data elements: Social Security number, driver’s license number, state identification card number, or account number, credit or debit card number, in combination with any required security code, access code, or password that would permit access to the individual’s financial account. The law requires notification to affected individuals without unreasonable delay, consistent with the legitimate needs of law enforcement or any measures necessary to determine the scope of the breach and restore the reasonable integrity of the data system. The notification must be in writing or, if the person agrees, by email, and must include specific details about the breach, the types of information involved, and steps individuals can take to protect themselves. The law does not mandate a specific timeframe like 60 days, but emphasizes “without unreasonable delay.” The absence of a specific penalty for non-compliance in the statute itself does not negate the requirement for notification, and enforcement could potentially be tied to broader consumer protection statutes or regulatory actions. The key is the compromise of personal information of an Idaho resident.

Idaho’s Consumer Data Protection Act (ICDPA) defines a “business” as any person that conducts business in Idaho or produces products or services that are targeted to Idaho residents and that alone or jointly determines the purposes and means of processing personal data. The ICDPA further specifies thresholds for applicability. A controller or processor is subject to the ICDPA if, in the preceding calendar year, it controlled or processed the personal data of at least 100,000 Idaho consumers, or controlled or processed the personal data of at least 25,000 Idaho consumers and derived more than 25% of its gross revenue from selling personal data. The key is the volume of Idaho consumers whose data is processed, not the total number of consumers processed generally, nor the percentage of revenue derived from data sales unless the lower consumer threshold is met. Therefore, a business processing 50,000 Idaho consumer data and deriving 30% of its gross revenue from selling that data would not be subject to the ICDPA, as it fails to meet either the 100,000 consumer threshold or the combined 25,000 consumer and 25% revenue threshold. The calculation for determining applicability focuses on these specific thresholds as outlined in the statute.

The Idaho Consumer Data Protection Act (ICDPA) requires businesses to provide consumers with specific rights regarding their personal data. One such right is the ability to opt-out of the sale of personal data. The ICDPA defines “sale” broadly, encompassing the exchange of personal data for monetary consideration, but also for other valuable consideration. This “other valuable consideration” is a key differentiator and requires careful analysis. When a business shares data with a third party for targeted advertising purposes, and the third party provides a service or benefit to the business in return for access to that data, even if no money changes hands directly, this can constitute a “sale” under the ICDPA. For instance, if a company provides its customer list to an analytics firm in exchange for detailed market trend reports that improve the company’s product development, this exchange of data for valuable insights qualifies as a sale. The opt-out mechanism is a fundamental consumer protection provision designed to give individuals control over how their data is monetized by businesses. Understanding the scope of “sale” is critical for compliance, as it dictates when opt-out requests must be honored and when specific disclosures are required. The law aims to create transparency and empower consumers in the digital economy.

The Idaho Consumer Data Protection Act (ICDPA) defines a “business” as an entity that conducts business in Idaho or produces or directs its activities toward residents of Idaho and alone or jointly determines the purposes and means of processing personal data, and that meets certain thresholds. These thresholds are based on the amount of personal data processed and the revenue derived from its sale or processing. Specifically, a business is subject to the ICDPA if, in the preceding calendar year, it controlled or processed the personal data of at least 100,000 Idaho consumers, excluding personal data processed solely for the purpose of completing an electronic funds transfer. Alternatively, a business is subject to the ICDPA if it controlled or processed the personal data of at least 25,000 Idaho consumers and derived more than 25% of its gross annual revenue from the sale of personal data. The question asks about the threshold for processing personal data for a business to be considered under the ICDPA, excluding data processed solely for electronic funds transfers. Based on the ICDPA, the lower threshold for processing personal data to trigger applicability, when not derived from sales, is 100,000 consumers.

The Idaho Consumer Data Protection Act (ICDPA) defines a “business” as an entity that conducts business in Idaho or produces or directs its activities toward Idaho residents and that meets certain thresholds. For the purposes of determining if an entity is a controller or processor, the ICDPA focuses on whether the entity determines the purposes and means of processing personal data. A “controller” is defined as the natural person or legal entity that alone or jointly with others determines the purposes and means of processing personal data. A “processor” is defined as a natural person or legal entity that processes personal data on behalf of a controller. In the scenario provided, the Idaho-based marketing firm, “Boise Analytics,” is engaged by “Mountain Gear Outfitters,” a national retailer, to process customer data for targeted advertising campaigns. Boise Analytics receives the data and is instructed on the specific parameters of the campaigns, including which customer segments to target and the types of advertisements to deliver. Boise Analytics has no independent authority to decide how the customer data is used beyond the explicit instructions provided by Mountain Gear Outfitters. Therefore, Boise Analytics acts as a processor, as it processes data on behalf of the controller, Mountain Gear Outfitters, which dictates the purposes and means of the processing. The ICDPA’s distinction between controllers and processors is crucial for understanding compliance obligations, as controllers generally bear more responsibility for data protection practices and responding to consumer rights requests.

Idaho’s approach to data privacy, particularly concerning sensitive personal information, emphasizes a tiered system of notification and security requirements. The Idaho Consumer Protection Act, while not a comprehensive privacy law like some other states, does contain provisions that can be interpreted in relation to data security breaches. Specifically, when a breach of unencrypted personal information occurs, a duty to notify affected individuals arises if the information is linked to an individual and the data controller has reason to believe that the information may be misused. The threshold for notification is generally tied to the risk of harm. In the scenario presented, the data controller, “Gem State Innovations,” experienced a breach involving unencrypted social security numbers and financial account numbers. These are unequivocally considered sensitive personal information under most privacy frameworks, including those implicitly referenced by Idaho’s consumer protection statutes and broader data security principles. The key consideration for notification under Idaho law, and analogous to many state breach notification laws, is the potential for identity theft or financial fraud. Since social security numbers and financial account numbers were exposed in an unencrypted state, the risk of misuse is high. Therefore, the obligation to notify affected Idaho residents is triggered. The explanation of why this is the correct course of action involves understanding that Idaho, while lacking a singular, overarching privacy statute akin to California’s CCPA/CPRA, still imposes obligations on businesses to safeguard personal information and notify consumers in the event of a breach that poses a risk of harm. This aligns with the general expectation of consumer protection and data security prevalent across the United States. The absence of a specific dollar threshold for damages in Idaho’s breach notification context means that the nature of the compromised data itself (sensitive financial and identity information) dictates the necessity of notification due to the inherent risk.

Idaho law, specifically the Idaho Consumer Data Protection Act (ICDPA), outlines the rights of consumers regarding their personal information. A key aspect of this act is the right to opt-out of the sale of personal data. The ICDPA defines “sale” broadly, encompassing the exchange of personal data for monetary or other valuable consideration. It does not require a direct monetary transaction; valuable consideration can include services, data itself, or other benefits that are not explicitly outlined as exceptions. When a business shares personal data with a third party in exchange for analytical insights that improve the business’s own product development, this exchange constitutes valuable consideration, thus falling under the definition of a “sale” for the purposes of the ICDPA, triggering the consumer’s right to opt-out. This is distinct from sharing data for purposes that are strictly necessary for the provision of a service requested by the consumer, or for compliance with legal obligations, which are typically not considered sales. The core principle is the transfer of data for benefit beyond the direct provision of a service.

The Idaho Consumer Data Protection Act (ICDPA) defines a “controller” as a natural person or legal entity that, alone or jointly with others, determines the purposes and means of processing personal data. The act specifies exemptions for certain entities and types of data processing. Specifically, it exempts governmental entities, financial institutions regulated by state or federal law, and covered entities or business associates regulated by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). It also exempts the processing of personal data for the purpose of the federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) or the federal Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA). Furthermore, personal data processed solely for the purpose of facilitating a communication transaction or for a transaction involving the sale of goods or services where the controller has a direct relationship with the consumer and the personal data is limited to what is necessary to fulfill the transaction or provide the service is also exempt. The scenario involves a Boise-based technology startup, “Innovate Solutions,” that develops and markets a cloud-based project management software. Innovate Solutions collects user data, including names, email addresses, and project details, to provide and improve its services. While Innovate Solutions is a private entity, it does not fall under the specific exemptions outlined in the ICDPA for financial institutions, HIPAA-covered entities, or entities processing data solely for FERPA or COPPA purposes. Therefore, Innovate Solutions, as a private entity determining the purposes and means of processing personal data for its business operations, qualifies as a controller under the ICDPA. The critical factor is its role in defining the “why” and “how” of data processing, irrespective of its size or whether it is a startup.

The Idaho Consumer Data Protection Act (ICDPA) establishes specific requirements for businesses handling the personal data of Idaho residents. A key aspect is the definition of “personal data” and the thresholds that trigger compliance obligations. The act defines personal data as information that is linked or reasonably linkable to an identified or identifiable natural person. It also defines “processing” broadly to include any operation performed on personal data, whether by automated means or not. The act applies to controllers that conduct business in Idaho or produce products or services targeted to Idaho residents and that, during the preceding calendar year, processed personal data of at least 100,000 Idaho consumers, or processed personal data of at least 25,000 Idaho consumers and derived more than 50% of their gross revenue from selling personal data. The scenario describes “TechNova Solutions,” a company operating in Idaho that processes personal data of Idaho residents. TechNova processed data for 95,000 consumers and derived 40% of its gross revenue from selling personal data. Since TechNova processed data for fewer than 100,000 consumers and did not derive more than 50% of its gross revenue from selling personal data, it does not meet either of the quantitative thresholds to be considered a “controller” under the ICDPA. Therefore, TechNova is not subject to the ICDPA’s requirements based on the provided data.

The Idaho Consumer Data Protection Act (ICDPA) grants consumers the right to opt out of the sale of personal data. A “sale” under the ICDPA is defined broadly to include the exchange of personal data for monetary consideration, but also for other valuable consideration. This includes situations where a business shares data with a third party in exchange for targeted advertising services or other benefits that enhance the business’s operations or marketing capabilities, even if no direct payment is made. Therefore, if a data broker in Idaho shares a customer’s browsing history with a marketing analytics firm in exchange for detailed market trend reports that the firm compiles, this constitutes a sale of personal data under the ICDPA, triggering the consumer’s right to opt out. The key is the exchange of valuable consideration, which can extend beyond direct financial transactions.

The Idaho Consumer Protection Act (ICPA), specifically Idaho Code Title 48, Chapter 6, governs unfair or deceptive practices in commerce. While the ICPA does not contain a specific private right of action for privacy violations as found in some other states’ comprehensive privacy laws, it does provide a framework for consumer protection. In the context of data privacy, a business’s misrepresentation or omission of material facts regarding the collection, use, or disclosure of personal information could be construed as a deceptive practice under the ICPA, potentially leading to enforcement actions by the Idaho Attorney General. The ICPA allows for injunctive relief and civil penalties. The Idaho Attorney General has the authority to investigate and prosecute violations of the ICPA. The core principle is that misleading consumers about how their data is handled constitutes a deceptive practice. Therefore, a business that falsely claims to anonymize data when it does not, and this misrepresentation influences a consumer’s decision to share their information, could be subject to enforcement under the ICPA. This enforcement would focus on the deceptive nature of the practice rather than a direct privacy right of the consumer to sue. The question probes the understanding of how general consumer protection laws in Idaho might indirectly address data privacy concerns through their prohibition of deceptive practices, rather than relying on a specific privacy statute.

Idaho’s data privacy landscape, while not as comprehensive as some other states, requires businesses to understand specific obligations when handling personal information of Idaho residents. The Idaho Consumer Protection Act (ICPA) and its associated provisions, particularly those related to data security, form the bedrock of these requirements. When a data breach occurs involving personal information of Idaho residents, the primary notification obligation falls on the entity that owns or licenses the compromised data. The definition of “personal information” under Idaho law is broad, encompassing a consumer’s name in combination with a Social Security number, driver’s license number, state identification card number, financial account number, or any required security code, debit card number, or credit card number, in combination with any required security code, access code, or password that would permit access to the consumer’s financial account. The notification must be made without unreasonable delay, but in any event, no later than forty-five (45) days after the discovery of the breach. This notification must be specific, informing affected individuals about the nature of the breach, the types of information compromised, and steps they can take to protect themselves. The law also outlines acceptable methods of notification, including written communication, electronic communication, or, if those methods are not feasible, substitute notice. The responsibility to notify is triggered by a breach of the security of the system where the personal information is stored, meaning unauthorized acquisition or access that compromises the security, confidentiality, or integrity of the personal information. Entities are expected to conduct a reasonable investigation to determine the scope of the breach and the individuals affected.

Idaho law, specifically the Idaho Consumer Data Protection Act (ICDPA), grants consumers certain rights regarding their personal data. One of these rights is the right to opt-out of the sale of personal data. The ICDPA defines “sale” broadly, encompassing the exchange of personal data for monetary consideration or other valuable consideration. It is crucial to understand that “valuable consideration” does not solely mean monetary payment. It can include other benefits that provide an advantage or worth to the party receiving the data, even if not directly financial. For instance, providing services in exchange for data, or gaining insights that improve a business’s operations, could constitute valuable consideration. The opt-out mechanism requires a controller to provide clear notice and a mechanism for consumers to exercise this right. The law specifies that a controller must honor an opt-out request within 15 business days of receiving it, with a possible extension of an additional 15 business days if reasonably necessary and the consumer is informed of the delay. This timeframe is a key compliance point for businesses operating under the ICDPA.

The Idaho Consumer Data Protection Act (IDAPA 36.04.01) establishes specific rights for consumers regarding their personal information and outlines obligations for businesses that collect and process this data. A key aspect of the act concerns the scope of entities that fall under its purview. The definition of a “business” is critical to determining applicability. Idaho law defines a business as any person that: (1) conducts business in Idaho or produces or markets products or services targeted to residents of Idaho; and (2) alone or jointly with others, determines the purposes and means of processing personal information; and (3) meets one or more of the following thresholds: (a) has annual gross revenues of more than $50 million; (b) annually buys, sells, or shares for commercial purposes the personal information of 100,000 or more consumers or households; or (c) derives 50% or more of its annual revenues from selling personal information or sharing personal information. Therefore, a business that processes the personal data of Idaho residents and meets the revenue threshold of $50 million annually is subject to the act, regardless of whether it targets Idaho residents specifically with its products or services, as long as it conducts business in Idaho. The key is the intersection of conducting business in Idaho and meeting one of the processing volume or revenue thresholds. The scenario presented clearly indicates the entity conducts business in Idaho and exceeds the annual gross revenue threshold.

Idaho’s Consumer Data Privacy Act (ICDPA) establishes specific obligations for businesses that collect personal information from Idaho residents. A key aspect of this law involves the rights granted to consumers regarding their data. One such right is the ability to opt-out of the sale of personal information. The ICDPA defines “sale” broadly, encompassing the exchange of personal information for monetary consideration, but also extending to other forms of valuable consideration. This includes situations where data is shared with third parties for targeted advertising or to improve a product, even if no direct payment occurs. Businesses must provide clear mechanisms for consumers to exercise this opt-out right, typically through a “Do Not Sell My Personal Information” link or a similar designation. Furthermore, the law mandates that businesses honor these opt-out requests and refrain from selling the consumer’s personal information to third parties. Failure to comply can result in enforcement actions by the Idaho Attorney General. The scope of “personal information” under the ICDPA is also comprehensive, covering data that can be linked to an identified or identifiable natural person. Understanding the nuances of what constitutes a “sale” and the procedural requirements for honoring opt-out requests is crucial for compliance.

The Idaho Consumer Data Protection Act (ICDPA) defines a “controller” as a natural person or legal entity that alone or jointly with others determines the purposes and means of processing personal data. A “processor” is defined as a natural person or legal entity that processes personal data on behalf of a controller. The Act also outlines specific obligations for controllers regarding data protection assessments and security measures. When a business operates solely as a service provider, meaning it processes data exclusively based on the instructions of a controller and does not independently determine the purposes or means of processing, it functions as a processor. Idaho law, like many other state privacy statutes, distinguishes between these roles, with controllers bearing the primary responsibility for compliance with the Act’s requirements. The question posits a scenario where a company provides data analytics services to various Idaho businesses, acting strictly on their instructions regarding the data processed and the purposes for which it is used. This operational model aligns precisely with the definition of a processor under the ICDPA, as the company does not independently determine the purposes or means of processing. Therefore, the company’s primary legal classification under the ICDPA in this context is that of a processor.

Idaho law, specifically the Idaho Consumer Data Protection Act (ICDPA), mandates that a data collector must provide specific disclosures to consumers. These disclosures are crucial for transparency and consumer awareness regarding the collection and processing of personal information. The ICDPA outlines a comprehensive set of information that must be presented to individuals at or before the point of collection. This includes details about the categories of personal data being processed, the purposes for processing, whether the data collector sells or shares personal information, and the rights available to consumers. Furthermore, it requires disclosure of contact information for the data collector and the process for consumers to exercise their rights. The act also specifies the requirements for obtaining consent for certain types of data processing, particularly for sensitive data. Understanding these disclosure obligations is fundamental to compliance with Idaho’s privacy framework, ensuring that consumers are adequately informed about how their data is handled.