Photo of Dustin Taylor

Dustin Taylor

Subscribe to Dustin Taylor's Posts

Dustin is a litigator whose practice primarily focuses on intellectual property disputes, including patent, trademark, and trade secret matters. He also has experience in litigation involving data access, including claims made under the California Unfair Competition Law, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and the California Computer Data Access and Fraud Act.

 

Contact:Read more about Dustin Taylor

Keypoint: In July 2023, plaintiffs have been busy opposing motions to dismiss in chat wiretapping, session replay, and VPPA cases while testing claims against a new technology.

This is the sixth installment in our monthly data privacy litigation reports to provide updates on how courts in the United States have handled emerging data privacy trends in the past month. In this post we look at dismissed chat wiretapping and session replay cases and VPPA cases overcoming the motion to dismiss stage.

There are many courts currently handling data privacy cases across the nation. Although illustrative, this update is not intended to be exhaustive. If there is another area of data privacy litigation about which you would like to know more, please reach out. The contents provided below are time-sensitive and subject to change. If you are not already subscribed to our blog, consider doing so to stay updated. If you are interested in tracking developments between blog posts, consider following us on LinkedIn.Continue Reading U.S. Privacy Litigation Update: July 2023

Keypoint: June 2023 maintained a trend of mostly favorable outcomes for defendants as courts continue to grant motions to dismiss in session replay and VPPA cases.

This is the fifth installment in our monthly data privacy litigation reports to provide updates on how courts in the United States have handled emerging data privacy trends in the past month. In this post we look at decisions to dismiss session replay and VPPA claims coming out of California courts.

There are many courts currently handling data privacy cases across the nation. Although illustrative, this update is not intended to be exhaustive. If there is another area of data privacy litigation about which you would like to know more, please reach out. The contents provided below are time-sensitive and subject to change. If you are not already subscribed to our blog, consider doing so to stay updated. If you are interested in tracking developments between blog posts, consider following us on LinkedIn.Continue Reading U.S. Privacy Litigation Update: June 2023

Keypoint: May 2023 saw victories for defendants as courts dismissed wiretapping claims based on website chat functionality and VPPA claims.

This is the fourth installment in our monthly data privacy litigation reports to provide updates on how courts in the United States have handled emerging data privacy tends in the past month. In this post we look at California courts who have dismissed wiretapping claims based on website chat functionality and VPPA claims.

There are many courts currently handling data privacy cases across the nation. Although illustrative, this update is not intended to be exhaustive. If there is another area of data privacy litigation about which you would like to know more, please reach out. The contents provided below are time-sensitive and subject to change. If you are not already subscribed to our blog, consider doing so to stay updated. If you are interested in tracking developments between blog posts, consider following us on LinkedIn.Continue Reading U.S. Privacy Litigation Update: May 2023

Keypoint: Claims brought under the Washington My Health My Data Act’s private right of action will turn on whether a plaintiff can prove actual damages that were caused by a violation effecting the plaintiff’s business or property.

Signed into law by Governor Jay Inslee on April 27, 2023, the Washington My Health My Data Act (MHMD) is a first-in-the-nation consumer health data privacy act with a private right of action.

We have been tracking the MHMD since it was first introduced in early January, provided a detailed analysis of the bill after it first passed the House in mid-March, and recently discussed its definition of “consumer health data” and private right of action. As we previously promised, in this post we take a deeper look at the private right of action with a particular focus on how Washington courts have handled CPA claims based on other conduct. We also provide two takeaways to help businesses better understand and evaluate their risk.Continue Reading Analyzing the Washington My Health My Data Act’s Private Right of Action

Keypoint: April 2023 saw developments in chat, session replay, voice recording, and VPPA litigation along with two new trends to watch in May.

This is our second installment in our monthly data privacy litigation reports to provide updates on how courts in the United States have handled emerging data privacy trends in the past month. In this post we look at developments in lawsuits relating to chat wiretap claims, session replay claims, VPPA claims, and voice recording lawsuits. (If any of these case theories are new to you, be sure to check out the “Overview” section at the bottom of the post.) We also analyze two new theories that have already spawned a series of demand letters and lawsuits.

There are many courts currently handling data privacy cases across the nation. Although illustrative, this update is not intended to be exhaustive. If there is another area of data privacy litigation about which you would like to know more, please reach out. The contents provided below are time-sensitive and subject to change. If you are not already subscribed to our blog, consider doing so to stay updated. If you are interested in tracking developments between blog posts, consider following us on LinkedIn.Continue Reading U.S. Privacy Litigation Update: April 2023

Keypoint: In March 2023, more California courts tackled motions to dismiss claims that chat features violate wiretapping laws while Georgia and Minnesota courts weighed in on VPPA claims.

This is the first of our monthly data privacy litigation reports to provide updates on how courts have handled emerging data privacy tends in the past month. In this post we look at developments in lawsuits relating to chat wiretap claims, session replay claims, VPPA claims, and BIPA claims. (If any of these case theories are new to you, be sure to check out the “Overview” section below.) There are many courts currently handling data privacy cases across the nation. Although illustrative, this update is not intended to be exhaustive. If there is another area of data privacy litigation about which you would like to know more, please reach out.

The contents provided below are time-sensitive and subject to change. If you are not already subscribed to our blog, consider doing so to stay updated. If you are interested in tracking developments between blog posts, consider following us on LinkedIn.Continue Reading U.S. Privacy Litigation Update: March 2023

Keypoint: The Southern District of New York dismissed a VPPA claim after finding use of the Meta Pixel does not violate the VPPA when used to transmit information about a visitor’s general activity on a webpage, even where that webpage also hosts video.

In June 2022, a plaintiff filed a complaint in the Southern District of New York that alleged the defendants violated the Video Privacy Protection Act (“VPPA”) by using the Meta Pixel. More than eight months later, the court dismissed the complaint after finding the plaintiff failed to state a claim for relief under the VPPA. Taking all the plaintiff’s allegations as true, the court nevertheless found a website that used the Meta Pixel to send information to Meta when a website visitor visited a webpage that contained both video and non-video content did not violate the VPPA.Continue Reading Privacy Litigation Update: SDNY Dismisses Video Privacy Protection Act Claim

Keypoint: In the wake of a recent California decision that allowed claims alleging use of chat functionality on website violated California wiretapping laws, three California district courts have dismissed nearly identical claims causing a split in Central District of California courts.

Following a February decision that allowed a complaint that alleged a website operator’s use of a customer support chat feature violated California wiretapping laws to proceed past the pleading stage, three California district courts have since dismissed nearly identical claims. The result leaves companies who may find themselves named as defendants in these lawsuits uncertain whether they will be able to escape litigation at the less costly motion to dismiss stage. In the below post, we analyze these decisions and their impact on future litigation over these claims.Continue Reading Privacy Litigation Update: California courts strike back against claims that website chat functionality violates wiretapping statutes

Keypoint: Slurry of litigation filed by privacy-plaintiffs has survived its first motion to dismiss challenge in a California court but faces tougher challenges ahead.

Anyone who has called into customer service for any major company has likely been told: “This call is being recorded for quality assurance.” Companies have long used those prepared messages to put callers on notice that their communications are recorded, avoiding claims that the companies have violated wiretapping laws in states that require all parties to a communication to consent for the communication to be recorded. Companies are now facing claims that offering the ability for their website visitors to chat with a virtual or human agent violates these same wiretapping statutes when the website visitor accesses the site from an all-party consent state. In this post, we examine the rise of these chat-based wiretapping claims and how website operators may hope to avoid them.Continue Reading Privacy Litigation Update: California courts will soon hear motions to dismiss in litigation that alleges chat functionality violates wiretapping statutes

Keypoint: In states with “two-party” consent laws, Privacy-Plaintiffs are bringing class action lawsuits against companies that use “session replay” technology on their websites.

Last month in the Northern District of Illinois a class action complaint was filed that alleges two defendants, TikTok and ByteDance, violate Federal and State wiretapping laws. The complaint alleges the conduct violates the Federal Wiretap Act and Massachusetts, Maryland, and Missouri state equivalent laws. The complaint does not allege violation of California, Florida, or Pennsylvania wiretapping laws despite similar claims being filed most often in these jurisdictions. The complaint also does not allege violation of any Illinois statute despite being filed in the Norther District of Illinois.

In this post, we explain what session replay technology is and how courts across jurisdictions have handled claims that the technology violates wiretapping statutes in two-party (also known as “all party”) consent states to date.

This article is part of our ongoing series of articles examining different types of privacy lawsuits filed across the country. Please click here to read our prior article on Video Privacy Protection Act lawsuits.Continue Reading Privacy Litigation Update: Illinois class action lawsuit joins string of wiretapping claims arising out of website operator use of session replay technology