An increasingly aggressive plaintiffs’ bar has brought purported class action suits based on the nearly ubiquitous use of tracking technologies used for website analytics. Although any actual harm to the plaintiffs is difficult to articulate, the health care industry has been plagued by a series of these cases. Now the plaintiffs may be moving to financial services with the potential for statutory penalties of hundreds of dollars per user when a duty of confidentiality can be credibly implicated. 

The tracking tags, pixels and similar website analytics technologies are nothing new. Rather, the technologies at issue in such complaints are widely used on websites and mobile applications across industries, including by government entities, to collect information about user behaviors and interactions with the online platform where they are embedded. That information is then sent to a third party for analytics used to enhance user experience on the platform. Many of these technologies are integral to an organization’s ability to ensure its websites and applications are functioning properly, among other things providing crash reports when users encounter issues. Additionally, many consumer-facing businesses contract with third parties to provide session replay scripts, a software that monitors and records web-user activity such as keystrokes, clicks, and scrolling.  Despite the pervasiveness of these technologies, plaintiffs have seized on ambiguities in the California state wiretap act, known as the California Information Privacy Act, as well as federal wiretap law as the basis for exceptionally large damage demands.Continue Reading Pixel Litigation Risk at Financial Institutions

GDPROrganizations which fail to implement appropriate technical and organizational security measures to protect personal data and suffer personal data breaches as a result, increasingly may find themselves facing the double whammy of both enforcement action by the UK Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), (which can include significant financial penalties) and potentially also group-style legal actions brought by data subjects.

British Airways, which suffered a cyber incident that is believed to have started in June 2018 and led to a personal data breach involving almost 500,000 of its customers, has found itself on the receiving end of such an action.Continue Reading UK Group-Style Data Breach Actions Continue

A federal judge in Oregon, Hon. Michael H. Simon, has recently upheld a $925 million statutory damages award against health supplement maker ViSalus for its violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”)—making this the largest TCPA damages award to date.

The underlying class action against ViSalus alleged the company placed nearly 2 million unsolicited robocalls nationwide to advertise its weight-loss and dietary products.  The class argued that the robocalls constituted unlawful telemarketing practices and violated the TCPA, and after a three-day trial in April of 2019, a jury agreed.
Continue Reading $925M TCPA Robocall Award Upheld

CCPARecent class action complaints against Zoom Video Communications, Inc. (“Zoom”) are interesting examples of the new risks posed by the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”) which took effect on January 1. While formal enforcement by the California Attorney General will not begin until July 1, the CCPA’s private right of action allows individuals to bring suits before July. Although the text of the CCPA’s private right of action would lead a reader to believe that the private right of action is limited to suits alleging a breach of personal information, apparently some plaintiffs are not shying away from attempting to use the CCPA to support other litigation.  How the California courts handle such lawsuits will be instructive to businesses who collect personal information from California residents.
Continue Reading Zoom Faces Class Action Complaints Alleging CCPA Violations