Interested in training for your team? Click here to learn more

Wiretap Class Actions: Claims From Using Third-Party AI-Powered Technologies to Collect Customer Communications

Recording of a 90-minute CLE video webinar with Q&A

This program is included with the Strafford CLE Pass. Click for more information.
This program is included with the Strafford All-Access Pass. Click for more information.

Conducted on Thursday, August 29, 2024

Recorded event now available

or call 1-800-926-7926

This CLE webinar will offer guidance to class action lawyers about the new wave of class action litigation and mass arbitration alleging that companies have violated state or federal wiretapping or privacy statutes by using third-party AI-driven algorithms to collect customer data for website analytic purposes. The program will review the technology, discuss plaintiffs' most current theories (and challenges), and suggest best practices for avoiding such claims in the first place.

Description

Hundreds of class actions and more recently, mass arbitrations, have alleged that website analytical technologies, such as session replay, tracking pixels, and chatbots, illegally intercept customer communications in violation of federal and state wiretapping laws and state privacy laws, including the California Invasion of Privacy Act. In the past, these claims generally have been dismissed on grounds that mouse movements, keystrokes, and similar data input by a user do not convey any type of substantive communication, that the user consented to the disclosure, or that third-party vendors were not intercepting communications in transit or using the information for their own purposes.

Courts from California to Massachusetts, however, are reconsidering these defenses in light of newer forms of website technologies, especially with the use of AI when the data is sent back to the software vendor to improve the AI software product. One California court has allowed a claim to go forward for aiding and abetting the wiretapping (by the third-party vendor) and another because the plaintiffs simply alleged that the vendor had the capability for such use.

There are several meritorious and effective defenses to these claims, but many businesses may not know that they are at risk of wiretap lawsuits, may assume incorrectly that they are already protected, do not know what these defenses are, or do not know what action should be taken.

Listen as this distinguished panel discusses the latest developments in class actions alleging undisclosed tracking software.

READ MORE

Outline

  1. Overview of website analytical technologies
  2. Purposes of federal and state wiretapping, privacy statutes
  3. How plaintiffs allege violations occur
  4. Defenses
  5. Recent cases
  6. Mitigation strategies

Benefits

The panel will review these and other relevant issues:

  • Is prior or contemporaneous consent required to defeat claims based on AI-infused software?
  • What is needed to establish standing?
  • Are third parties actual "parties" to a communication?
  • What might be special concerns in the healthcare setting?

Faculty

Abramson, Glen
Glen Abramson

Partner
Milberg Coleman Bryson Phillips Grossman

Mr. Abramson is a Partner at Milberg who has served as co-lead counsel in numerous successful consumer protection,...  |  Read More

Lally, Amy
Amy P. Lally

Partner
Sidley Austin

Ms. Lally is a trial lawyer who practices in all areas of litigation, including class actions, false advertising...  |  Read More

Ross, Ian
Ian M. Ross

Partner
Sidley Austin

Mr. Ross represents clients in business disputes, commercial and securities litigation, government investigations, and...  |  Read More

Access Anytime, Anywhere

Strafford will process CLE credit for one person on each recording. All formats include course handouts.

To find out which recorded format will provide the best CLE option, select your state:

CLE On-Demand Video