As discussed in a previous post on facial recognition technology, a putative class action has been filed against Facebook over the collection of “faceprints” for its online photo tagging function, Tag Suggestions. (See e.g., Licata v. Facebook, Inc., No. 2015CH05427 (Ill. Cir. Ct. Cook Cty. filed Apr. 1,
Privacy
Important Circuit Court Ruling Limits Scope of VPPA Liability
The Eleventh Circuit issued a notable ruling this week limiting a mobile app’s liability under the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA), 18 U.S.C. § 2710, a law enacted in 1988 to preserve “consumer” personal privacy with respect to the rental or purchase of movies on VHS videotape, and which has…
Facial Recognition Technology: Social Media and Beyond, an Emerging Concern
This week, a major self-regulatory initiative intended to address privacy concerns associated with facial recognition technology hit a significant stumbling block. Nine consumer advocacy groups withdrew from the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA)-initiative due to a lack of consensus on a minimum standard of consent. The NTIA initiative had…
Mobile Alphabet Soup…What Exactly Is an ATDS under the TCPA?
An Important Issue for Text-Message Marketers
There has been an uptick in litigation under the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), 47 U.S.C. § 227 – likely due to the increased use of mobile marketing (not to mention the availability of statutory damages between $500 and $1,500 per violation). And…
New California Law Impacts Use of Information from Minors, Offers Right to Delete
Law Targets Sites and Mobile Apps Directed to Minors, Offers “Online Eraser”
Likely to Have Nationwide Effect
On July 1st of this year, new amendments to the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act Rule (COPPA Rule) came into effect, with perhaps the most pronounced changes being the expansion of COPPA…
U. S. Supreme Court Unanimously Rule that GPS Installation and Tracking of a Vehicle Constitutes a Search, But The Justices Disagree on Rationale – Are Lines Being Drawn on Privacy Rights and New Technology?
In a narrowly-drawn majority opinion, the United States Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Antoine Jones that the Government’s attachment of a GPS-tracking device to a vehicle, and the subsequent monitoring of the movements of that vehicle on public streets, constitutes a search. Because the Government conceded in the…
There’s No Sense Waiting to See What the U.S. Supreme Court Has to Say about GPS Tracking
That appears to be the opinion of Magistrate Judge David Noce in United States v. Robinson, No. 4:11-cr-00361 (D. Mo. Dec. 27, 2011), who ruled that GPS tracking of a public official suspected of having a no-show municipal job did not require a warrant. This is, of course, the…
Proskauer on Privacy: Boston Edition
Following the success of our Annual Proskauer on Privacy Conference in New York, we are taking the program on the road and invite you to attend our first Proskauer on Privacy: Boston Edition. Presented by the firm’s Privacy and Data Security Group, this conference will focus on the latest…
It’s Ten O’Clock. Does the FBI Know Where You (Or At Least Your Cell Phone) Are?
UPDATE: Audio files of the oral argument in this appeal are available on the Web site of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
If the FBI wants to know where an individual is, and if the Department of Justice prevails in a case rescheduled for argument tomorrow in snowy Philadelphia, the FBI (or other law enforcement authorities) will be able to obtain that individual’s cell site data from the individual’s cellular carrier on a showing of “reasonable grounds” to believe that the data is “relevant and material to an ongoing investigation.” This is an issue that may have important implications for law enforcement, with significant impact on wireless carrier operations (and costs), and dramatic implications for privacy in the wireless world. In In re Application of the United States of America, No. 08-4227 (Third Cir.), attorneys for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, arguing as amicus curiae, will urge the appeals court to uphold a lower court ruling that applications for cell site data should be supported by a showing that satisfies the higher probable cause standard under the Fourth Amendment.
New Jersey Appellate Court Says, Take “Loving Care” with Employee Personal Communications
In Stengart v. Loving Care Agency, 2009 N.J. Super. LEXIS 143 (App. Div. June 26, 2009), a New Jersey appellate court refused to enforce a provision in an employer’s electronic communications policy that purported to give the employer ownership of all employee personal communications on the employer’s system. The particular messages at issue were sent by an executive to her attorney on her personal, password-protected Web mail account. The opinion contains some valuable reminders for employers that promulgate such policies, and a caution for attorneys who may be called upon to review such communications.