Bill Overview
Title: EAVESDROP Act
Description: This bill requires internet-connected devices that include a microphone to notify consumers how and under what circumstances the device collects information from ambient noise, such as human dialogue or any other sound that occurs in the range of the device's microphone. Further, such devices must include a reasonable method to deactivate such collection.
Sponsors: Rep. Scalise, Steve [R-LA-1]
Target Audience
Population: People who use internet-connected devices with microphones
Estimated Size: 250000000
- The bill targets internet-connected devices with microphones, such as smart speakers, smartphones, and laptops.
- A significant portion of the global population owns such devices due to the proliferation of technology.
- Billions of people use the internet and own at least one internet-connected device with a microphone.
- Smartphones are one of the most common internet-connected devices with microphones, and there are over 6 billion smartphone users worldwide.
Reasoning
- The EAVESDROP Act will most impact people who are concerned about privacy and use devices with microphones frequently, such as smart speakers and smartphones.
- The policy has a limited budget but affects a vast population, requiring effective allocation of resources towards enforcement and public awareness campaigns.
- Privacy advocates are likely to be highly supportive of this policy, while those with less concern about digital privacy might be indifferent.
- Devices with high usage among tech-savvy individuals such as smartphones will be majorly impacted.
- Those less concerned with privacy or those who do not use advanced internet-connected devices may not experience significant changes.
Simulated Interviews
Software Engineer (Austin, TX)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I feel this policy is a step in the right direction for privacy.
- It's comforting to have control over what gets recorded and when.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Student (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 24 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I guess it's useful, but I haven't really thought about my privacy much.
- It might be good for people who are concerned about these things.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Corporate Lawyer (New York, NY)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's crucial to have regulations like this, especially for someone in my field.
- I appreciate having transparency from these devices.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Home Assistant Developer (Boise, ID)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Balancing user control with innovation is key.
- This policy might slow down some tech developments, but it's necessary.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Retired (Miami, FL)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Seems useful, but it doesn't impact my everyday life much.
- I trust the companies I use to handle things properly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 4 |
Digital Content Creator (Seattle, WA)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Great step towards ensuring digital creatives' privacy.
- I feel more secure that my creative space is protected.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Barista (Chicago, IL)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't really worry about privacy; this doesn't change much for me.
- I guess it's good for those who have more to protect.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
College Student (Boston, MA)
Age: 19 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 19/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think better privacy controls are necessary.
- I want to know when and how my devices are listening.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Mechanical Engineer (Kansas City, MO)
Age: 42 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's good to have more control over devices; I've always been wary of what's recorded.
- This policy enhances my confidence in using more technology.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Elementary School Teacher (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This act is necessary for teaching digital citizenship.
- It's a great starting point for discussions on privacy with students.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $2000000000 (Low: $1500000000, High: $2500000000)
Year 2: $1700000000 (Low: $1300000000, High: $2200000000)
Year 3: $1500000000 (Low: $1100000000, High: $2000000000)
Year 5: $1200000000 (Low: $900000000, High: $1600000000)
Year 10: $700000000 (Low: $500000000, High: $1000000000)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- Consumer privacy concerns are a major motivator for this legislation, despite potential compliance costs for industries.
- Constant legal and technological updates might necessitate ongoing monitoring and revisions to implementation strategies.
- Initial higher costs are due to the redesign and retrofitting of existing technologies.