Photo of Andrew Longhi

Andrew Longhi

Andrew Longhi advises national and multinational companies across industries on a wide range of regulatory, compliance, and enforcement matters involving data privacy, telecommunications, and emerging technologies.

Andrew's practice focuses on advising clients on how to navigate the rapidly evolving legal landscape of state, federal, and international data protection laws. He proactively counsels clients on the substantive requirements introduced by new laws and shifting enforcement priorities. In particular, Andrew routinely supports clients in their efforts to launch new products and services that implicate the laws governing the use of data, connected devices, biometrics, and telephone and email marketing.

Andrew assesses privacy and cybersecurity risk as a part of diligence in complex corporate transactions where personal data is a key asset or data processing issues are otherwise material. He also provides guidance on generative AI issues, including privacy, Section 230, age-gating, product liability, and litigation risk, and has drafted standards and guidelines for large-language machine-learning models to follow. Andrew focuses on providing risk-based guidance that can keep pace with evolving legal frameworks.

Contact:Read more about Andrew LonghiEmail

Updated July 15, 2024.  Originally posted July 11, 2024.

On July 8, 2024, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and a group of Internet Service Providers, represented by national and regional trade associations, filed supplemental briefs with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in In re MCP NO. 185. On July 15, the Sixth Circuit granted an administrative stay until August 15, 2024 “[t]o provide sufficient opportunity to consider the merits of the motion.”

The Sixth Circuit is considering challenges to the FCC’s Safeguarding and Securing the Open Internet Order (Open Internet Order), which reclassified broadband Internet access service as a telecommunications service under Title II of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.  The Order was scheduled to take effect on July 22, 2024, but the ISP representatives asked for a stay.  The Sixth Circuit requested that the parties address the implications of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the Chevron Doctrine in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo for the petitioners’ motion to stay enforcement.Continue Reading Industry Groups and FCC File Briefs in Net Neutrality Case Following Loper Bright

With most state legislative sessions across the country adjourned or winding down without enacting significant artificial intelligence legislation, Colorado and California continue their steady drive to adopt comprehensive legislation regulating the development and deployment of AI systems. 

Colorado

Although Colorado’s AI law (SB 205), which Governor Jared Polis (D) signed into law in May, does not take effect until February 1, 2026, lawmakers have already begun a process for refining the nation’s first comprehensive AI law.  As we described here, the new law will require developers and deployers of “high-risk” AI systems to comply with certain requirements in order to mitigate risks of algorithmic discrimination. 

On June 13, Governor Polis, Attorney General Phil Weiser (D), and Senate Majority Leader Robert Rodriguez (D) issued a public letter announcing a “process to revise” the new law before it even takes effect, and “minimize unintended consequences associated with its implementation.”  The revision process will address concerns that the high cost of compliance will adversely affect “home grown businesses” in Colorado, including through “barriers to growth and product development, job losses, and a diminished capacity to raise capital.”Continue Reading Colorado and California Continue to Refine AI Legislation as Legislative Sessions Wane

On June 10, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a petition for a writ of certiorari in Consumers’ Research et al. v. Federal Communications Commission et al.  In its petition, the advocacy group Consumers’ Research, along with a small carrier and a five individuals, sought the Supreme Court’s review of the constitutionality of…

Continue Reading U.S. Supreme Court Declines to Review Constitutional Challenges to Federal Universal Service Fund Program

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) recently adopted two Notices of Apparent Liability (NALs) in connection with its investigation into AI-based “deepfake” calls made to New Hampshire voters on January 21, 2024.  The NALs follow a cease-and-desist letter sent on February 6 to Lingo Telecom, LLC (Lingo), a voice service provider that originated the calls, demanding that it stop originating unlawful robocall traffic on its network, which we previously blogged about here.Continue Reading FCC Proposes Fines for AI-based “Deepfake” Robocalls Before New Hampshire Primary

On May 10, 2024, a divided Second Circuit panel held that a device that merely selects and dials numbers from a stored list does not constitute an “automatic telephone dialing systems” (ATDS) under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).  The panel observed in Soliman v. Subway Franchisee Advertising Fund Trust Ltd. that its holding…

Continue Reading Second Circuit: a Device that Dials from a Stored List Is Not an “ATDS” under the TCPA

Over the past few months, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) has received requests from U.S. Senators asking the FTC to investigate the data collection practices of several automotive manufacturers.  Last week, Senators Ed Markey (D-MA) and Ron Wyden (D-OR) sent a letter to the FTC asking the agency to investigate several automakers for “deceiving their customers by falsely claiming to require a warrant or court order before turning over customer location data to government agencies.”  Among other things, the letter alleges inconsistent data collection and retention practices in the industry, asserting that some automakers only collect location data for a “critical safety event” (e.g., collision, air bag deployment, or automatic emergency braking event) while others “routinely collect[] and retain[] vehicle location data.”  The letter also states that only one automaker has a policy of informing consumers about legal demands for their data.  The letter refers to the FTC’s recent geolocation “crack down” in other contexts and urges “the FTC to investigate these auto manufacturers’ deceptive claims as well as their harmful data retention practices” and to, “in addition to taking appropriate action against the companies, . . . consider holding these companies’ senior executives accountable for their actions.”Continue Reading Data Collection by Auto Manufacturers under Scrutiny

On May 2, 2024, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) released a draft Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for consideration at the agency’s May 23 Open Meeting that proposes to “prohibit from recognition by the FCC and participation in [its] equipment authorization program, any [Telecommunications Certification Body (TCB)] or test lab in which an entity identified…

Continue Reading FCC to Consider Prohibiting “Covered List” Entities from Participation in Agency’s Equipment Authorization Program

A new post on the Covington Inside Privacy blog discusses remarks by California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA) Executive Director Ashkan Soltani at the International Association of Privacy Professionals’ global privacy conference last week.  The remarks covered the CPPA’s priorities for rulemaking and administrative enforcement of the California Consumer Privacy Act, including with respect to connected…

Continue Reading CPPA Executive Director Remarks on Policy and Enforcement Priorities

On April 4, 2024, Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel released a draft of the agency’s long-anticipated Safeguarding and Securing the Open Internet Order (Open Internet Order), which would reclassify broadband Internet access service as a telecommunications service under Title II of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.  The FCC is expected to consider and vote on the draft at its next Open Commission Meeting scheduled for April 25, 2024.  The FCC is expected to adopt the Open Internet Order now that Democrats hold a 3-2 majority at the agency.Continue Reading FCC Shares Draft Open Internet Order Ahead of April Meeting

Last month, the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) raised the fixed broadband speed benchmark from 25/3 megabits per second (“Mbps”) to 100/20 Mbps and concluded that “advanced telecommunications capability is not being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion.” As a consequence, the FCC concluded that “section 706 [of the Telecommunications Act of 1996] requires [it] to ‘take immediate action to accelerate deployment of such capability by removing barriers to infrastructure investment and by promoting competition in the telecommunications market.’”Continue Reading FCC Raises Speed Benchmark for Fixed Broadband Services