PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 4, 2015
Data Broker Accountability and Transparency Act of 2015
Prohibits data brokers from obtaining or causing to be disclosed personal information or any other information relating to any person by making a false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation, including by providing any document that the broker knows or should know to: (1) be forged, counterfeit, lost, stolen, or fraudulently obtained; or (2) contain a false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation.
Defines "data broker" as a commercial entity that collects, assembles, or maintains personal information concerning an individual who is not a customer or an employee of that entity in order to sell or provide third party access to the information. Allows the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to exempt certain data brokers from this Act.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires data brokers to establish procedures to ensure the accuracy of: (1) the personal information they collect, assemble, or maintain; and (2) any other information that specifically identifies an individual, unless the information only identifies an individual's name or address.
Requires data brokers to provide individuals a cost-free means to review their personal or identifying information.
Allows individuals to dispute the accuracy of their personal information with a written request that the data broker make a correction.
Requires a data broker, with regard to disputed public record information that is available for public inspection from federal, state, or local governments, to: (1) inform the individual of the source of the information and, if reasonably available, where to direct the individual's request for correction; or (2) correct the inaccuracy in the broker's records if the individual provides proof that the public record has been corrected or that the broker was reporting the information incorrectly.
Requires a data broker, with regard to disputed non-public information of a private nature, to: (1) note the information that is disputed, (2) independently verify the information, and (3) correct the inaccuracy if the broker was reporting the information incorrectly.
Requires data brokers to provide individuals with a reasonable means of expressing a preference to exclude their information from being used, shared, or sold for marketing purposes.
Sets forth authority for the FTC and states to enforce this Act.
People & committees
Sen. Markey, Edward J. [D-MA] · D–MA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.668 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.668 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.668 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.668 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.