surveillance pricing

Several states have enacted laws to limit surveillance pricing, which involves using a customer’s personal data to set individualized prices on goods and services. Three states—Connecticut, Maryland, and New Jersey—were among the first to pass these restrictions, though they cover different retailers and exceptions. The legislation has met with opposition from business groups concerned that the rules are overly broad and could interfere with existing discount programs.

Connecticut, Maryland, and New Jersey have enacted laws to restrict surveillance pricing, which uses personal data to set individualized prices. The laws vary in coverage, exceptions like loyalty programs, and enforcement mechanisms, with Maryland’s law effective October 1 and New Jersey’s imposing a moratorium on new electronic shelf labels.

Sen. Josh Hawley held a hearing to address concerns about 'surveillance pricing,' where companies use AI and personal data to set individualized prices. Industry experts warned that AI could accelerate such practices, raising alarms over personalized pricing models.

Sen. Josh Hawley held a hearing to address 'surveillance pricing,' a practice where companies use AI and personal data to set personalized prices. Industry experts warned that AI could accelerate the adoption of individualized pricing models.

Connecticut, Maryland, and New Jersey have enacted laws to restrict companies from using personal data for surveillance pricing, a practice that sets individualized prices for goods and services. The laws vary in scope, with exceptions for loyalty programs and supply-based pricing, but face opposition from business groups concerned about overreach. At least 11 other states considered similar legislation.

Three states—Connecticut, Maryland, and New Jersey—have enacted laws to restrict 'surveillance pricing,' which uses personal data like browsing history to set individualized prices. The laws vary in scope, with exceptions for loyalty programs, subscription pricing, and cost-based differences. Business groups have opposed similar legislation in 11 other states, arguing it could harm discounts and compliance costs.

New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill signed a law prohibiting businesses from using personal data to set different prices for identical products. The Fair Price Protection Act aims to prevent surveillance pricing by restricting retailers from leveraging online activity, location, and purchasing history to alter prices for individual shoppers.

New Jersey governor Mikie Sherrill signed a law prohibiting retailers from using personal data to charge different prices for identical products, making the state the third in the US to ban the practice. The Fair Price Protection Act aims to protect consumers from surveillance pricing by preventing price changes based on online activity, location, and purchasing history.

New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill signed the Fair Price Protection Act into law, banning surveillance pricing. The law prohibits businesses from using personal data to set different prices for identical products.

New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill signed the Fair Price Protection Act to ban surveillance pricing, a practice that uses data like location, income, and browsing history to set prices. The law aims to prevent companies from charging higher prices for identical items based on consumer data, with Consumer Reports noting some shoppers pay up to 23% more for groceries.

A new law in New Jersey aims to increase grocery affordability by banning surveillance pricing. Anthony Johnson reports on the issue from Newark.

The article criticizes California's AB 2564 bill, called the 'surveillance pricing' bill, which could increase grocery costs by regulating discounts and coupons. It argues the legislation might eliminate loyalty discounts and coupons, burdening shoppers.

Toronto mayor Olivia Chow and local councillors are pushing to ban surveillance pricing, a practice where businesses use consumer data to set variable prices. The mayor claims this practice could exploit residents facing high living costs.

The article discusses 'surveillance pricing,' a practice where companies use personal data to charge individuals higher prices than their peers. It highlights how data exploitation enables targeted pricing strategies and suggests ways to counteract this.

Consumer Reports found Uber and Lyft charge different prices for the same ride to nearby users, with examples showing up to a $30 discrepancy. The investigation also raised concerns about fictitious discounts and fare-sharing practices, while companies denied pricing based on rider identity. States like Maryland and Connecticut have started restricting 'surveillance pricing' practices.

Two House bills in Michigan aim to ban 'surveillance pricing,' a practice where companies use consumer data to set different prices for the same product. The bills, which passed the House and advanced to the Senate, target e-commerce sellers using location and browsing history for pricing. Similar legislation was introduced in the Senate by Democratic lawmakers.

Pennsylvania's House passed a bill to ban ride-share companies from using surveillance pricing based on personal data. The legislation, introduced by Rep. Andre Carroll, aims to prevent price discrimination by services like Uber and Lyft, and will now move to the Senate for consideration.

Consumer Reports found that Uber and Lyft use AI to set different prices for the same ride under identical conditions, with discrepancies up to $30. The investigation also revealed potential fictitious discounts and higher fare shares kept by the companies, which both firms dispute. Riders are advised to compare prices and scrutinize crossed-out 'discount' pricing.

The Washington Post faces a class-action lawsuit alleging 'surveillance pricing' of subscribers, where personal data was allegedly used to charge longtime customers higher prices. The lawsuit claims the practice began in late 2024 and was disclosed in March 2026 under New York law. The Clarkson Law Firm seeks punitive and statutory damages, citing unfair and deceptive practices.

The Washington Post faces a class action lawsuit in D.C. Superior Court over its use of reader data to set subscription prices through 'surveillance pricing.' Plaintiffs allege The Post tracked subscribers' reading habits and demographic data since December 2024 without disclosure, only revealing the practice in March 2026 when required by New York law. Lead plaintiff Chelsea Blink claims she would have canceled her subscription had she known about the data tracking.

New York lawmakers voted to ban 'surveillance pricing,' but digital price tags were not included in the restriction. The bill now awaits Governor Kathy Hochul's approval.

New York State Senate and Assembly passed three bills regulating data centers, surveillance pricing, and digital stalking. Other environmental, housing, and entertainment measures were abandoned and await Governor Kathy Hochul's signature.

The New York State Senate and Assembly passed three bills regulating data centers, surveillance pricing, and digital stalking, while abandoning other environmental, housing, and entertainment measures, which will now be signed by Governor Kathy Hochul.

Colorado's governor vetoed a bill that would have banned surveillance pricing, the strongest measure against algorithmic pricing. Consumer advocates criticized the decision, arguing it favors corporations over workers. Maryland had already passed a similar law in April, but Colorado's proposal was more comprehensive.

Colorado Governor Jared Polis vetoed a bill that would have banned surveillance pricing for wages and consumer goods, the strongest such measure in the nation. Consumer advocates criticized the decision, while Maryland previously approved a similar law for grocery stores.

Colorado's governor vetoed a bill that would have banned surveillance pricing for setting wages and consumer prices. Consumer advocates criticized the veto, and Maryland had previously passed a narrower law against surveillance pricing in grocery stores.

A proposed class-action lawsuit alleges JetBlue tracked customer behavior during flight bookings to adjust prices without clear consent, using data like browsing activity and user characteristics. JetBlue denies the claims, stating fares depend on demand and seat availability, not personal data. The case highlights concerns about 'surveillance pricing' and AI-driven dynamic pricing in the airline industry.

Maryland has become the first U.S. state to prohibit surveillance pricing in grocery stores, a practice that uses consumer data to set variable prices. The ban aims to prevent discriminatory pricing tactics based on shoppers' personal information.

Maryland has become the first U.S. state to ban surveillance pricing in grocery stores, prohibiting grocers and third-party delivery services from using consumer data to set higher prices. Governor Wes Moore signed the law, which critics argue includes significant exceptions.

An airline is facing a lawsuit for allegedly using 'surveillance pricing' by increasing fares based on customer data, with potential payouts for affected passengers. The case highlights concerns over data-driven pricing strategies and consumer rights in the travel industry.

JetBlue faces a proposed class action lawsuit alleging it uses customers' personal data to dynamically set ticket prices through 'surveillance pricing.' The lawsuit follows a social media exchange where the airline suggested customers clear their browser cache or use incognito mode to view lower fares, raising concerns about data-driven fare adjustments.

The article discusses 'surveillance pricing,' a practice where companies exploit information asymmetries by using data collected through digital surveillance to set prices. It critiques this as a form of consumer exploitation, linking it to broader issues in data privacy and market fairness.