Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Privacy Ruling Reverberates in Case Against Facebook
Plaintiffs suing Facebook over its alleged practice of scanning direct messages are invoking a recent ruling from U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh clearing the way for a similar case against Yahoo Inc.
Ruling last month, Koh allowed plaintiffs to move forward with privacy claims under the Stored Communications Act and California's Invasion of Privacy Act, finding plaintiffs put forth sufficient facts to allege Yahoo had illegally shared the contents of e-mails with third parties. See the Order at http://bit.ly/1AEgmQ7.
“Yahoo's own FAQ page admits that Yahoo shares e-mail content with third parties,” Koh wrote.
Though not a complete win for plaintiffs ' Koh also knocked out allegations under the federal Wiretap Act, 18 U.S.C. '2510, et. seq.'and the California Constitution ' lawyers with Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, Pomerantz and Carney Bates & Pulliam seem to think the Yahoo ruling will help their case against Facebook. The team submitted notice of the ruling to U.S. District Judge Phyllis Hamilton, who is presiding over the case.
The suit alleges Facebook intercepted users' private messages and scanned them for links, which the social networking company then used to add “likes” to Facebook pages associated with those links.
The Lieff Cabraser team pointed out Koh refused to decide whether Yahoo scanned the e-mails in question while they were in transit to its users, or while they were stored on Yahoo's servers. Yahoo had argued the e-mails were in storage when they were scanned, a defense to claims under the Wiretap Act and California's Invasion of Privacy Act, Cal. Penal Code '631.
“The court must defer resolution of whether Yahoo accessed the emails only after the emails were on Yahoo's servers until after discovery makes clear where and how Yahoo's scanning technology intercepted the emails,” Koh wrote.
Facebook's lawyers with Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher made the same argument in their June motion to dismiss ' claiming plaintiffs' Wiretap Act claim falls flat because the messages in question were stored on Facebook's servers when they were scanned. See, http://bit.ly/YINgS9. A hearing on that motion is scheduled for September.
Koh also sidestepped another hot-button privacy issue in the Yahoo case ' whether the company is covered by an exemption in the Wiretap Act for practices conducted by e-mail providers in the ordinary course of business. Last year, Koh refused to apply that exemption to Google in a similar case over its handling of Gmail, but the position has not been consistently adopted in the district.
Koh punted that question in the Yahoo case after dismissing plaintiffs' Wiretap Act claims on other grounds.
The suit was brought in February by a class of non-Yahoo users who allege they did not consent to Yahoo screening their messages. Yahoo's terms stipulate it will scan e-mails sent to and received by its users, in order to provide more specifically targeted advertisements. The company says it's up to Yahoo account holders to inform acquaintances without accounts of this policy.
Yahoo is represented by a team from Morrison & Foerster's San Francisco office and ZwillGen's Washington, DC, office. Plaintiffs are represented by Girard Gibbs and Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer.
Koh dismissed a claim under the Wiretap Act, which requires that only one party to the communication consent to interception. Yahoo's terms of service agreement “explicitly acknowledges that Yahoo scans and analyzes users' e-mail for various purposes,” Koh wrote.
Marisa Kendall is a Reporter for The Recorder, an ALM sibling publication of Internet Law & Strategy.
Plaintiffs suing Facebook over its alleged practice of scanning direct messages are invoking a recent ruling from U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh clearing the way for a similar case against
Ruling last month, Koh allowed plaintiffs to move forward with privacy claims under the Stored Communications Act and California's Invasion of Privacy Act, finding plaintiffs put forth sufficient facts to allege Yahoo had illegally shared the contents of e-mails with third parties. See the Order at http://bit.ly/1AEgmQ7.
“Yahoo's own FAQ page admits that Yahoo shares e-mail content with third parties,” Koh wrote.
Though not a complete win for plaintiffs ' Koh also knocked out allegations under the federal Wiretap Act, 18 U.S.C. '2510, et. seq.'and the California Constitution ' lawyers with
The suit alleges Facebook intercepted users' private messages and scanned them for links, which the social networking company then used to add “likes” to Facebook pages associated with those links.
The
“The court must defer resolution of whether Yahoo accessed the emails only after the emails were on Yahoo's servers until after discovery makes clear where and how Yahoo's scanning technology intercepted the emails,” Koh wrote.
Facebook's lawyers with
Koh also sidestepped another hot-button privacy issue in the Yahoo case ' whether the company is covered by an exemption in the Wiretap Act for practices conducted by e-mail providers in the ordinary course of business. Last year, Koh refused to apply that exemption to
Koh punted that question in the Yahoo case after dismissing plaintiffs' Wiretap Act claims on other grounds.
The suit was brought in February by a class of non-Yahoo users who allege they did not consent to Yahoo screening their messages. Yahoo's terms stipulate it will scan e-mails sent to and received by its users, in order to provide more specifically targeted advertisements. The company says it's up to Yahoo account holders to inform acquaintances without accounts of this policy.
Yahoo is represented by a team from
Koh dismissed a claim under the Wiretap Act, which requires that only one party to the communication consent to interception. Yahoo's terms of service agreement “explicitly acknowledges that Yahoo scans and analyzes users' e-mail for various purposes,” Koh wrote.
Marisa Kendall is a Reporter for The Recorder, an ALM sibling publication of Internet Law & Strategy.
How Secure Is the AI System Your Law Firm Is Using?
What Law Firms Need to Know Before Trusting AI Systems with Confidential Information In a profession where confidentiality is paramount, failing to address AI security concerns could have disastrous consequences. It is vital that law firms and those in related industries ask the right questions about AI security to protect their clients and their reputation.
Fifth Circuit Rejects Majority 'Independent Economic Value' Test for Infringement Damages
Most of the federal circuit courts that have addressed what qualifies either as a "compilation" or as a single creative work apply an "independent economic value" analysis that looks at the market worth of the single creation as of the time when an infringement occurs. But in a recent ruling of first impression, the Fifth Circuit rejected the "independent economic value" test in determining which individual sound recordings are eligible for their own statutory awards and which are part of compilation.
The Power of Your Inner Circle: Turning Friends and Social Contacts Into Business Allies
Practical strategies to explore doing business with friends and social contacts in a way that respects relationships and maximizes opportunities.
AI Governance In Practice
Regardless of how a company proceeds with identifying AI governance challenges, and folds appropriate mitigation solution into a risk management framework, it is critical to begin with an AI governance program.
Authentic Communications Today Increase Success for Value-Driven Clients
As the relationship between in-house and outside counsel continues to evolve, lawyers must continue to foster a client-first mindset, offer business-focused solutions, and embrace technology that helps deliver work faster and more efficiently.