in August, 2020, a couple of months after Hart brought his suit. As part of the settlement TWC was forced to change its disclosure statements to inform users it collected their data continuously and that tracking consent wasn't necessary to use the app.
The settlement of the LA case led to the judge in Hart's case dismissing some of his claims, hence the amended complaint linked above. This updated suit alleged privacy rights violations, and declaratory judgment and unjust enrichment claims against TWC, and cut a pair of previous claims under the Consumer Legal Remedies Act and California Unfair Competition Act.
"The court agrees with TWC that the resolution of plaintiffs' [privacy violation] claim under the California Constitution turns on individualized factual questions of whether each user actually maintained their reasonable expectation of privacy," as Judge Tigar put it in his opinion. He said that other courts in his district had found that users who continue to use an application"despite exposure to materials" informing them of potential privacy violations implied their consent by continued usage. The judge added that"the record demonstrates that there is a … 'panoply of sources' from which users could have learned that TWC used their location data for advertising purposes" in the wake of the 2020 Los Angeles decision.
United Kingdom Latest News, United Kingdom Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: TheSun - 🏆 64. / 61 Read more »
Source: techradar - 🏆 51. / 63 Read more »
Source: i newspaper - 🏆 8. / 89 Read more »
Source: nottslive - 🏆 96. / 52 Read more »