One of the most interesting proposals to me was the concept of an information fiduciary: SCHATZ: In the time I have left, I want to — I want to propose somethi

One of the most interesting proposals to me was the concept of an information fiduciary: SCHATZ: In the time I have left, I want to — I want to propose something to you and take it for the record. I read an interesting article this week by Professor Jack Balkin at Yale that proposes a concept of an information fiduciary. People think of fiduciaries as responsible primarily in the economic sense, but this is really about a trust relationship like doctors and lawyers, tech companies should hold in trust our personal data. Are you open to the idea of an information fiduciary and shrine and statute? ZUCKERBERG: Senator, I think it's certainly an interesting idea, and Jack is very thoughtful in this space, so I do think it deserves consideration. So I went and dug up the paper they're talking about. [1] It's really interesting and I think probably does a better job than most of the other proposed regulations. Typical regulation is to set forth processes that companies must follow. If instead we just tell companies that 'you're responsible for not misusing this' we don't get all the bloat that can shut out small businesses, it avoids first amendment issues and instead of being antagonistic or alternative to anti trust action, it complements it. [1] https://lawreview.law.ucdavis.edu/issues/49/4/Lecture/49-4_Balkin.pdf https://lawreview.law.ucdavis.edu/issues/49/4/Lecture/49-4_B...