In a recent Bloomberg Law piece by Cassandre Coyer covers the issue with what we call off the shelf privacy software solutions. The end result of the Bloomberg Law article is that there are a lot of big fines being handed out to companies like Honda Motors and Healthline by the California Privacy Protection Authority but the issue is that these tools are often not integrated correctly. The solution to this is that Captain Compliance offers to handle the integration and setup for clients to make sure that the settings are compliant and helping businesses to avoid regulatory fines and litigation from law firms like Pacific Trial Attorneys & Tauler Smith.
One-size-fits-all privacy software may check a box—but it won’t protect your business from regulatory fines.
In theory, compliance tools are supposed to simplify privacy risk. Companies plug them into their websites or apps and gain peace of mind: cookie banners deployed, data flows tracked, user preferences respected. But in practice, a growing number of enforcement actions and penalties tell a different story. This is something thats new though. The big CCPA fines had not been common and Connecticut just fined The Ticket Network. 4 years ago there was little to no action outside of the GDPR fines which totaled billions of Euros.
Companies Are Still Getting Fined—Even With Tools in Place
Several companies that relied on well-known privacy vendors according to Cassandre’s Bloomberg piece called out well respected privacy software pioneers including OneTrust and TrustArc were still penalized for violating state privacy laws because the integration and setup was misconfigured. Healthline Media, for example, faced a $1.55 million penalty from California’s privacy regulator, in part because its tool failed to stop data-sharing even when users opted out.
Honda also ran afoul of regulators after its cookie banner (powered by OneTrust) didn’t offer a proper opt-out highlighting how even established enterprise-grade tools can fall short when poorly configured and that some privacy software companies may put the onus on the client vs. handling themselves.
These aren’t fringe cases. They reveal a core issue in how businesses approach compliance.
Software Alone Doesn’t Equal Compliance
The truth is simple: out-of-the-box compliance tools are only as effective as the business’s ability to customize and integrate them into its actual digital environment.
Most websites, apps, and marketing stacks are unique. They include different scripts, trackers, CDNs, analytics platforms, and embedded tools that interact in complex ways. Privacy software cannot anticipate all of these setups and default settings often miss key risks.
That means unless the tool is properly tailored, it might show a consent banner while trackers still fire in the background. It might log a user’s opt-out—without disabling the relevant scripts. Or it might generate a false sense of security while sensitive data continues to flow.
Regulators Are Paying Attention
Privacy regulators are no longer satisfied with surface-level controls. The California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA), for example, has repeatedly emphasized that companies must validate how their consent mechanisms and data flows actually function. That requires testing, auditability, and active management—not just vendor contracts. Oregon’s enforcement agency said at the Global Privacy Summit that they are going to ramp up enforcement and then we have 18 other states to look out for.
Companies that rely too heavily on their vendors, without independent verification, are being penalized. As privacy laws evolve across California, Colorado, Connecticut, and then there’s the CIPA and VPPA cases to try and avoid. It ends up being a field of landmines. The standard is shifting toward active governance and technical due diligence.
What Businesses Should Do Instead
To reduce risk and improve real compliance posture, companies should:
- Map the full tech stack: Understand what scripts, tags, and trackers are running, including third-party apps and plugins.
- Test from the user’s perspective: Use browser tools and privacy scanners to confirm opt-outs actually work as expected.
- Avoid default configurations: Customize the tool to match your consent strategy, data flows, and jurisdictional requirements.
- Work cross-functionally: Involve engineering, marketing, legal, and IT in implementation—compliance is not a siloed function.
- Monitor continuously: Re-test after site updates, ad campaigns, or third-party code changes that might reintroduce risks.
- Don’t assume the vendor is liable: Regulators hold the business—not the vendor—accountable for violations. Only Captain Compliance will cover your fine if you’re a client of theirs.
A Wake-Up Call for the Industry
Privacy software vendors play an important role, but the burden of proper implementation and validation lies with the organization unless you’re working with Captain Compliance then you can rest assured that you have a superhero there to help you and take responsibility for whatever happens.
Tools are necessary, but not sufficient.
The businesses that avoid fines in the next phase of privacy enforcement will be the ones that combine smart technology with rigorous governance—and treat compliance as an ongoing, integrated process, not a checkbox.
