Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 30 SEPTEMBER 2024

Promising Decision In Wiretapping Case, Win For Businesses

Sheppard
Sheppard
Contributor
Sheppard

Sheppard

Businesses turn to Sheppard to deliver sophisticated counsel to help clients move ahead. With more...

View firm profile
Explore more from Sheppard

Those tracking CIPA litigation are familiar with the recent decision holding in favor of a company whose site had an online chat operated by a vendor.

United StatesPrivacy

Those tracking CIPA litigation are familiar with the recent decision holding in favor of a company whose site had an online chat operated by a vendor. The court in that case held (1) that the company had not violated the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA), and (2) that its chat was not unauthorized "wiretapping." This ruling came as welcome news to companies who offer online chat features, especially those who face—or fear—similar lawsuits.

The case, Gutierrez v. Converse Inc., 2024 WL 3511648 (C.D. Cal. July 12, 2024), followed a similar pattern and set of claims as others have faced. The plaintiff alleged that she used a third-party enabled chat function on Converse's website and that the chat providers stored the chat conversation on third-party servers without her consent. Thus, her attorneys argued, the chat provider aided and abetted "wiretapping" under Section 631(a) of the CIPA.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from