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

In December 2024, New York Governor Kathy Hochul signed into law two bills (A8872A and S2376B; collectively, the “Bills”) that amend New York’s Data Breach Notification Law.1 The Bills introduce a maximum thirty-day timeframe for notifying affected New York residents of a reportable “breach of the security of the system”2 under

While there are many significant federal laws and regulations related to cybersecurity, states have led the way in regulating this area on a general, sector-agnostic basis, with the most notable and widely acknowledged state cybersecurity provisions being state data breach notification laws.  However, more recently, states have focused on passing comprehensive privacy, rather than security, laws, and 2025 promises to be a continuation of this trend, with eight additional comprehensive state privacy laws coming into effect next year.  Continue Reading Making a List and Checking it Twice:  Navigating State Privacy and Security Regulations This Year

Throughout 2024, financial sector regulators sharpened their focus on data protection and cybersecurity issues impacting financial institutions and the public. Key federal agencies like the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”), and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) have been joined by state regulators, such as the New York Department of Financial Services (“NYDFS”), in proposing and finalizing significant rulemaking, pursuing novel enforcement actions, and issuing influential guidance. 2025 promises to be a continuation of this considerable trend.  Continue Reading Dashing Through Cybersecurity Regulations in the Financial Services Sector in 2024

On October 2, 2024, the New York State Department of Health (“NYSDOH”) finalized and adopted new hospital cybersecurity regulations. Effective immediately, hospitals in New York State are required to report to NYSDOH as promptly as possible, but not later than 72 hours after, determining that a cybersecurity incident has occurred. A cybersecurity incident is an

On Friday, August 2, Governor J.B. Pritzker of Illinois signed into law SB2979, an amendment to the state’s landmark biometric privacy law. The amendment offers a welcome step forward to correcting the rapid overexpansion of potential damages associated with violations of the law without curbing any of its privacy protections. The measure amends the state’s Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”) in two significant ways. First, the law, as amended now expressly includes electronic signatures as a form of “written release.” Second, the amendment limits actions for recovery to a maximum of one violation per plaintiff, rather than one violation per instance of collection or transmission of biometric information. This post examines the amendment and its impacts on businesses collecting biometric information in the state. We also highlight notable biometric privacy developments in Texas.Continue Reading Biometric Privacy Update: Illinois Legislature Balances BIPA, but Don’t Mess with Texas

With the Rhode Island Data Transparency and Privacy Protection Act (the “Act”), Rhode Island is the latest state to pass a comprehensive privacy law and join the evolving U.S. privacy landscape. The Act will take effect on January 1, 2026, the same date as the Indiana and Kentucky privacy laws.Continue Reading Rhode Island Joins the Fray with New Comprehensive State Privacy Law