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

On April 11, 2025, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) released additional detail regarding the Final Rule implementing former President Biden’s Executive Order 14117, “Preventing Access to Americans’ Bulk Sensitive Personal Data and United States Government-Related Data by Countries of Concern” (the “Final Rule”), which went into effect on April 8, 2025. The release included additional

Today, the Department of Justice’s (“DOJ”) Final Rule implementing former President Biden’s Executive Order 14117, “Preventing Access to Americans’ Bulk Sensitive Personal Data and United States Government-Related Data by Countries of Concern” (the “Final Rule”) took effect.

Earlier this year, Ropes & Gray published an alert providing an overview of the Final Rule, material changes

In an International Association of Privacy Professionals (IAPP) article, health care partner David Peloquin and data, privacy and cybersecurity associate Jake Barr along with Legend Biotech Chief Privacy Officer and Assistant General Counsel Corey Dennis discuss the landmark rule limiting sensitive data transfers to “countries of concern.” The article reviews key aspects for health care

In 2024, financial sector regulators prioritized cybersecurity issues impacting financial institutions and the public. Key U.S. federal agencies—including the Securities and Exchange Commission, Federal Trade Commission, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau—have been joined by state regulators such as the New York Department of Financial Services in significant new federal and state regulations and more

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

In December 2024, the Assistant Secretary for Technology Policy/Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (“ASTP/ONC”) within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) published two final rules that establish health data interoperability and information blocking regulations (the “New HTI Final Rules”).

The New HTI Final Rules will affect Trusted Exchange