Today I came across an incredible story of OneTrust, a privacy-law-compliance start-up based in Atlanta.
OneTrust landed at No. 1 on this year’s Inc. 5000, with more than $70 million in 2019 revenue and a staggering 48,337.2 percent three-year growth rate. It is among the global leaders in privacy-law-compliance technology with a suite of digital tools that gives companies a clearer view of all the user data they accumulate.
This enables them to comply with privacy laws, like the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) which gives consumers greater control of how companies can use their data.
Whilst Enterprise B2B SaaS and analytics isn’t the most sexiest space, in many cases, firms that play there can be the fastest-growing, most scaleable and profitable (and do good things at the same time).
In an age of Big Tech monopolies, increasingly intelligent AI and API-powered platform business models, growing regulatory oversight and appetite, and increasing consumer-awareness, OneTrust and others are clearly riding a tidal wave.
Read the full story here
2018 has been a significant year for internet regulation. The EU’s GDPR has significantly raised the bar for data protection & leading technology companies have been hammered from all sides due to various scandals & Congressional investigations. Today more than ever, citizens & governments are rightly concerned about personal data & issues including privacy, security, payments etc. Whether or not the regulators & consumers will be able to force the requisite amount of change on the leading tech companies, we shall see.
Interestingly, these issues were hot topics way back when the internet was early but going mainstream. Between 2000-2004, I wrote and delivered a brand new university course called ‘e-commerce law’ with key modules covering these issues. In 2004, I analysed the Governments prohibition of online casinos in my first academic article published in QUT’s law journal, titled ‘The Prohibition of Online Casinos in Australia: Is It Working?’. If you fancy a read, access it here.
I’ve pasted the introduction here as a few points are still interesting:
Preliminary online research of consumer gaming activity was utilised to develop an assumption that [after 2 years of prohibition] prohibition is not working. A key reason for this is the futility of prohibition given the unique nature of Internet technology. This article will also critique Government motives for prohibition, as arguably, the best approach to deal with interactive gaming was not implemented. The relevant question for public policy appears to be not whether online gambling can be controlled, but the extent to which it can be controlled.
These issues are still relevant in today’s online world where a handful of companies control the majority of our online data, purchases, browsing habits etc. Whether the current local & global regulatory frameworks and user tools go far enough to balance that control – and whether enough users actually care about this – only time will tell.