What Business Owners Need to Know About the Email Privacy Act

In a rare act of bipartisanship—fueled by the heavily debated revelations and FBI inquiries leading up to the recent presidential election—the U.S. House of Representatives recently and unanimously passed the Email Privacy Act (H.R. 387).

The “EPA” is arguably the most important step toward better protecting cloud-based information.



Under the current law—the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) of 1986—authorities can obtain content stored on the cloud from an Internet Service Provider (ISP) without the need to obtain judicial approval. If the new EPA is approved by the Senate and signed into law by President Trump, the updated law would require search warrants before any content—the actual communications in emails, the text in documents, images, videos and other forms of data—held by ISPs (e.g. stored on iCloud, Microsoft’s One Drive, Google, Gmail, ShareFile or Dropbox to name a few) is made available.

So what does this mean for business owners?

Businesses, large and small, depend on the Internet and, increasingly, cloud-based services to store private data. It’s virtually impossible today to remain competitive otherwise. With that in mind, here’s what businesses need to know about the EPA:

It can be beneficial to businesses because:

1. It gives additional protection

The EPA would help businesses, big and small, by giving them some margin of additional protection. It does so by requiring a judge to make an independent determination there is “probable cause” to issue a warrant, as opposed to simply requiring whatever government official or agency seeking the information to have an “articulable suspicion.”

2. It elucidates the current law

The EPA clarifies when ISPs must, and need not, respond to governmental demands for the disclosure of their customers’ information.

3. It can give U.S. companies a competitive edge

Given the widespread complaints abroad about the lack of legal protection available in the United States, the EPA makes U.S.-based cloud services and U.S. companies that store private information on the Internet more competitive internationally.

It can be less beneficial to businesses because:

1. Internal corporate communications can still be accessed

All businesses should know that internal emails among “officers, directors, employees or agents of [a] person or entity for the purposes of carrying out their duties” can still be accessed from an ISP by the government by an administrative subpoena or other means without a warrant.

2. As can public information

Publicly available information that “advertises or promotes a product or service” can also be accessed without a search warrant.

While the EPA is far less than a perfect solution for the protection of privacy, it is a good sign that reasonable minds have unanimously come together to constructively address this important issue—and update a 30-year-old law in need of modernization. May this be the first of many good things to come!

Spread the love
Previous articleImprove Your Financial Expertise and Watch Your Business Thrive
Next articleThe Ultimate Guide to Facebook Advertising
David A. Robinson
David A. Robinson's representative defense victories include multiple judgments for a corporate hospital conglomerate wrongfully accused of orchestrating a false arrest, libel, and other purported acts of intentional wrongdoing; a unanimous jury verdict in favor of an NYSE-traded silicon chip manufacturer in a multi-million dollar products liability action; a jury verdict exonerating a law firm sued for alleged suppression of free speech rights; a judgment rejecting breach of contract, unfair competition, and other tort claims against an association of emergency room physicians; a defense arbitration award following a 43-day evidentiary hearing, dismissing claims of accounting manipulation and fraud against sellers of vertically-aligned manufacturing businesses; a judgment exonerating an entertainment industry client of fraud, conversion, and unfair business practice charges; a judgment exonerating a nationwide manufacturer of freight trailers in a multi-party wrongful death/products liability action; the dismissal of numerous misrepresentation and breach of warranty claims against sellers of various hotel, shopping center, and apartment properties; numerous defense judgments against executive wrongful discharge claims; a defense judgment following a four-part trial involving embezzlement through a “Ponzi” scheme of hundreds of millions of dollars spread across dozens of sham entities and offshore accounts; and multiple judgments invalidating competitor trademarks. David’s representative plaintiff victories include multiple judgments quieting title and expunging competing ownership claims to commercial, retail and residential property in both California and Colorado; a jury verdict against a real estate attorney for fraud and malpractice; a judgment validating millions of dollars’ worth of disputed preferred corporate stock; a judgment extinguishing disputed easement/right-of-way claims across beach front property; a judgment for fraud and breach of warranties against the seller of an interstate freight shipping business; a judgment for fraud against preserving trade secret information belonging to several ECG clients; the seller of a franchised hotel property near Disneyland; multiple judgments and permanent injunctions enforcing the rights of corporate shareholders, directors, and elected governmental officials and to inspect documents, compel special elections and force the resignation of senior corporate managers; a settlement, reached mid-way through trial, awarding the client 100% of a disputed multi-million dollar California lottery prize; a stipulated judgment, entered after the commencement of trial, reforming and enforcing an NYSE commercial lender’s recorded security interest in a complex of commercial properties; a settlement awarding the client exclusive title to multiple patents issued in the United States and China; and a settlement establishing a shipyard’s right to a 35-year sublease extension. David also has extensive experience successfully representing clients in prosecuting and defending shareholder derivative actions, particularly those involving shareholder voting rights, stock buyouts, mergers, acquisitions, corporate control issues, and the appointment of provisional corporate directors.