Colin Knisely – Duane Morris TechLaw

February 27, 2023March 3, 2023 by Duane Morris

District Court Reaffirms Dismissal of Wiretapping Claims Under California Invasion of Privacy Act

On the heels of holding that defendants’ use of session replay software did not constitute a violation of the California Invasion of Privacy Act, Judge William Alsup in Williams v. What If Holdings LLC and ActiveProspect Inc. has now denied the plaintiff’s request for leave to amend. In doing so, the court reaffirmed its previous holding that the plaintiff’s allegations only established that ActiveProspect’s use of session replay software functioned as a tool that supported What If’s management of its own website data, and not as a means of eavesdropping and aggregating information for ActiveProspect’s own purposes.

Read the full Alert on the Duane Morris LLP website.

February 13, 2023March 3, 2023 by Duane Morris

Will Website Chat Feature Wiretapping Lawsuits Rise?

Entering the conversation, the United States District Court for the Central District of California recently denied a motion to dismiss claims alleging that a website’s chat features and use of session replay software violate the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA). Notably, this court rejected a forum selection clause in the website’s terms of use and went on to hold that allegations that the plaintiff shared “personal information” in the chat were sufficient to maintain a claim.

Read the full Alert on the Duane Morris LLP website.

January 20, 2023March 3, 2023 by Duane Morris

30-Year-Old Video Tape Statute Fueling New Class Action Lawsuits

Perhaps you are old enough to recall when consumers used to have to go to video stores like Blockbuster Video to rent a movie. And perhaps you recall the excitement of scoring a copy of the always limited “new release.” It was during these “archaic” times that Congress passed the federal Video Privacy Protection Act in response to a newspaper publishing Robert Bork’s video rental history during his U.S. Supreme Court nomination.

Read the full Alert on the Duane Morris LLP website.

October 27, 2022March 3, 2023 by Duane Morris

Website Tracking Technology Risks

As companies take advantage of new technologies in their interactions with customers and employees, they need to be mindful of the risks associated with implementation of those types of systems. This is especially true in the realm of federal and state privacy statutes, which in some instances have been created recently to address privacy concerns. There are also existing laws that are now being applied in a different context.

Read the Law360 article on the Duane Morris LLP website.

October 10, 2022March 3, 2023 by Duane Morris

Does Tracking User Activity on Websites Violate Electronic Interception Laws?

A new wave of class action lawsuits filed in California, Pennsylvania and Florida target companies that use technologies to track user activity on their websites, alleging such practices, when done without obtaining a user’s consent, violate electronic interception provisions of various state laws. The two technologies at issue are: 1) session replay software and 2) coding tools embedded in chat features. Session replay software tracks a user’s interactions with the website—their clicking, scrolling, swiping, hovering and typing—and creates a stylized recording of those interactions and inputs. Coding tools create and store transcripts of the conversations users have in a website’s chat feature. The plaintiffs in this new string of class actions allege that recording their interactions with a website and sending that recording to a third party for analysis without their consent is an illegal invasion of their privacy.

Read the full Alert on the Duane Morris LLP website.

April 20, 2021March 3, 2023 by Duane Morris

Court Holds “Websites Are Not Places of Public Accommodation”

Over two years after hearing oral arguments, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals finally issued an opinion in Gil v. Winn-Dixie, Case No. 17-13467, overturning the Florida federal district court’s finding that the grocery store chain violated Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by having an inaccessible website. In the 67-page decision, the Court of Appeals held that “websites are not places of public accommodation” under the ADA and that the Winn-Dixie website was not an “intangible barrier” to goods, services, privileges and advantages of Winn-Dixie’s physical stores.

Read the full Alert on the Duane Morris LLP website.

October 10, 2019 by Duane Morris

Supreme Court Passes on Challenge to Extension of Title III to Websites and Mobile Apps

On October 7, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States issued an order denying certiorari in Domino’s Pizza, LLC v. Robles, a case that would have required the Supreme Court to determine the application of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to websites and mobile applications. The Supreme Court’s order means a Ninth Circuit decision applying Title III to websites and mobile apps will stand, even in the absence of Department of Justice-promulgated regulations outlining applicable compliance standards.

On September 1, 2016, Guillermo Robles, who is visually impaired, filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. He alleged that Domino’s website and mobile app were incompatible with his chosen screen-reading software, and thus violated Title III of the ADA, among other statutes. Domino’s moved for summary judgment, in part on the basis that Title III of the ADA does not extend to its website or mobile app. The District Court found that Title III did apply to Domino’s website and app, but granted summary judgment on the grounds that imposing liability on Domino’s without clear standards for satisfying Title III obligations would violate the company’s due process rights. Robles then appealed.

View the full Alert on the Duane Morris LLP website.