A Status Report on the California Consumer Privacy Act

A Status Report on the California Consumer Privacy Act

Yesterday, I did a webinar for the California Lawyers Association on the status of the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA). This post recaps the discussion. A Quick Overview of the CCPA The CCPA imposes 6 new obligations on covered businesses:…

Illinois Supreme Court Authorizes Biometric Lawsuits Without Any Allegation of Harm–Rosenbach v. Six Flags

Six Flags, the amusement park operator, allegedly violated Illinois Biometric Privacy Statute by collecting a minor’s fingerprint without consent. The state appeals court held that plaintiff had to allege harm beyond the information collection without consent. The Illinois state supreme…

Unmasking Effort Mooted by Single Publication Rule–Glassdoor v. Andra

Glassdoor allows employees to review employers. An employer, Andra, was unhappy about ten pseudonymous reviews posted about it from June 2014 to June 2015. In August 2015, it sought pre-suit discovery of the reviewers’ identities. Glassdoor opposed the request and…

Fourth Amendment Limits NYC’s Demands for Airbnb Customer Records

As part of its ongoing crackdown on short-term lodging, New York City passed an anti-Airbnb ordinance scheduled to take effect next month. HomeAway was also affected by the law, but I’ll focus on Airbnb. The ordinance addresses the challenges faced…

41 California Privacy Experts Urge Major Changes to the California Consumer Privacy Act

41 California Privacy Experts Urge Major Changes to the California Consumer Privacy Act

41 California privacy lawyers, professionals, and professors are urging the California legislature to make major changes to the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), which the legislature hastily passed in 2018. The letter highlights six significant problems with the CCPA, including:…

2H 2018 Quick Links, Part 5 (Privacy, Advertising, Consumer Reviews)

Privacy * Winston Smith v. Facebook, No. 17-16206 (9th Cir. Dec. 6, 2018): “the connection between a person’s browsing history and his or her own state of health is too tenuous to support Plaintiffs’ contention that the disclosure requirements of…

Best and Worst Internet Laws [Repost from Concurring Opinions’ Archive]

[In 2007, I guest-blogged at the group law professor blog Concurring Opinions. With the demise of that blog, I am now archiving my guest posts on my own blog. This post first appeared on February 15, 2007.] __ [Preface: I’ve already…

Google Photos Defeats Privacy Lawsuit Over Face Scans--Rivera v. Google

Google Photos Defeats Privacy Lawsuit Over Face Scans–Rivera v. Google

This case provides a glimpse into the legacy of the Supreme Court’s Spokeo decision on the injury-in-fact requirements for Article III standing in federal court. When it was issued, I called Spokeo a “jurisprudential clusterfuck.” Indeed, the subsequent caselaw has been…

512(h) Doesn’t Preempt Doe Unmasking Lawsuits–Strike 3 v. Doe

This is my second Strike 3 blog post this week. I imagine this won’t be the last. In this case, a Doe defendant sought to quash the unmasking subpoena submitted to his/her IAP. The defendant argued that the unmasking subpoena was…

Court Blasts “Copyright Troll” for Treating Courts “as an ATM”–Strike 3 v. Doe

Strike 3 produces pornography. The court calls it a “copyright troll.” It has filed nearly 2,000 copyright infringement cases in the past 13 months. With that many cases, it’s bound to run into a skeptical judge, and whoa, did Judge…