Showing posts with label class-action suit. Show all posts
Showing posts with label class-action suit. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 25, 2011

Facebook Cookie Spurs Class-Action Suit

Seal of the en:United States District Court fo...Image via WikipediaThis blog was remiss in not reporting on a class-action complaint filed September 30 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Davis et al. v. Facebook, Inc. (Case No. 5: 2011cv04834).

The case, reported by Examiner.com and elsewhere, alleges that social media leviathan Facebook violated the Federal Wiretap Act [18 U.S.C. sec. 2511], the Stored Electronic Communication Act [18 U.S.C. sec. 2701] and the Computer Fraud &Abuse Act [18 U.S.C. sec. 1030] when it admitted surreptitiously tracking its members' computer usage after users logged off the social media site.

The 15-page complaint alleges as its class members active Facebook account users for the period from May 27, 2010, through September 26, 2011, when it was first publicized that Facebook purportedly conceded employing cookies to track its users' Internet site visits post-sign-off. Examiner.com reports the plaintiffs have retained Prof. Henry H. Perritt, Jr., author of Law and the Information Superhighway, as an advisor. Related suits have been filed in several other states, including Arizona, Alabama, Illinois and Kentucky.


Enhanced by Zemanta

Friday, April 15, 2011

Myspace Class Action Suit Target for Allegedly Sharing Personal Data

Image representing MySpace as depicted in Crun...Image via CrunchBaseBrooklyn resident and Myspace member Linda Virtue has her name attached as plaintiff to a 13-count class-action suit filed this week in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York against the Beverly Hills, Calif.-based social media platform for allegedly sharing members' personal data and Internet browsing histories with aggregators without the members' approval.

The 33-page complaint in Virtue v. Myspace, Inc (Case No. 11-cv-1800) includes counts alleging common law claims, such as conversion, breach of contract, breach of the implied warranty of good faith and fair dealing, and invasion of privacy, along with violation of the Stored Data Communications Act [18 U.S.C. sec. 2701 et seq.] and unfair and fraudulent business practices. According to Bloomberg News, the plaintiffs contend that Myspace provides the names and browsing history of users to aggregators while at the same time assuring members they can restrict access to their personal information.

Nothing like kicking Myspace when it's down. According to the Bloomberg article, Myspace traffic plunged 29 percent in February to 62.6 million visitors worldwide, compared to 88 million global visitors in 2010.  Myspace owner News Corp. reportedly is looking to unload the social media platform to online music Website www.Vevo.com

Enhanced by Zemanta

Thursday, August 6, 2009

Digital Content Removal Kindles Class-Action Suit Against Amazon

1984 George OrwellImage by Geek Tonic via Flickr

When Amazon remotely deleted bootlegged digital versions of George Orwell's Animal Farm and 1984 from its e-reader Kindle, it may have thought it was just doing the right thing. But now that Amazon finds itself a defendant in a class-action suit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, it probably will, in Orwellian terms, "doublethink" its decision.

In the case of Justin Gawronski and A. Bruguier, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Amazon. com, Inc. and Amazon Digital Services, Inc., the plaintiffs sued Amazon for trespass to chattels, conversion, breach of contract, violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act, and violation of the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (18 U.S.C. sec. 1030) over the remote removal of 1984 from Kindle. The 18-page complaint was filed July 30.

Buyers of the Kindle electronic book reader agree to Amazon's terms of service, which enables the Delaware corp. to modify, suspend or discontinue the service without liability to consumers. From Amazon's perspective, consumers are not buying a book, which is tangible property, but rather, a service that Amazon controls. Low-tech types may gloat that were they in good faith to buy a paperback of 1984 to accompany their Cliff Notes version at Borders that turned out to be an unauthorized version of the futuristic novel, the bookstore would be hard-pressed to snatch the book back from them without refunding their money.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out for Amazon. A bit of advice to Amazon: if the court grants class status to the Complaint and Winston Smith becomes a named plaintiff, you might want to settle, because a federal courtroom is no Ministry of Love.


Reblog this post [with Zemanta]