Arlo Technologies' first "End-of-Life Policy,” disclosed Jan. 1 to existing customers who bought the company’s security cameras, was a breach of contract and violation of consumer protection laws, alleged a Monday class action (docket 5:23-cv-00534) in U.S. District Court for Northern California in San Jose.
Rebecca Day
Rebecca Day, Senior editor, joined Warren Communications News in 2010. She’s a longtime CE industry veteran who has also written about consumer tech for Popular Mechanics, Residential Tech Today, CE Pro and others. You can follow Day on Instagram and Twitter: @rebday
Plaintiffs Craigville Telephone and Consolidated stepped up efforts to gather emails and Skype messages among individuals who knew about T-Mobile’s expansion of fake ring tones, said a Friday memorandum of law (1:19-cv-07190) in U.S. District Court for the Northern Division in Chicago.
Amazon profited from using biometric technology to automatically link individuals’ biometrics with other forms of personal information and “hold out their database of biometrics/Amazon One as a product/service to other companies,” alleges a Thursday class action (docket 1:23-cv-00901) in U.S. District Court for Southern New York in Manhattan.
U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon for Southern New York denied Roomster’s motions for dismissal, to stay discovery and for a protective order in a fraud case brought by the FTC and five states to thwart Roomster's proliferation of fake positive online reviews. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act doesn't shield Roomster from its alleged violations of federal and state consumer protection laws, said McMahon's decision and order Wednesday (docket 1:22-cv-07389).
T-Mobile’s process for notifying customers about its November data breach was “far from straightforward and woefully inadequate,” alleged the ninth known federal class action (docket 2:23-cv-00766) resulting from the breach, filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court for Central California in Los Angeles.
Cloud server company Hyperlync Technologies sued T-Mobile Tuesday for breach of contract and quantum meruit. It alleged in a class action (docket 2:23-cv-00734) in U.S. District Court for Central California in Los Angeles that the carrier failed to honor agreements it had with Sprint before T-Mobile's Sprint buy closed in April 2020.
T-Mobile “tried to downplay the value of what was stolen,” alleged the eighth federal privacy class action (4:23-cv-00438) arising from the carrier’s November data breach that it disclosed in a Jan. 19 8-K report (see 2301230046). T-Mobile believes the bad actor first retrieved data through a compromised application programming interface (API) around Nov. 25, but the company failed to detect the unauthorized activity until Jan. 5, the complaint noted.
Apple “hypocritically” tried to distinguish itself from competitors with privacy assurances for its customers but “flagrantly engages” in tracking their usage, alleged a Monday privacy class action (docket 5:23-cv-426) in U.S. District Court for Northern California in San Jose.
T-Mobile’s “intentionally misleading public statements” about its “nearly annual” data breaches ignore the “serious harm” its security flaws cause customers, said a Tuesday class action (docket 2:23-cv-00142) in U.S District Court for Western Washington in Seattle. By our count, it's the seventh federal class action against T-Mobile since the carrier disclosed in a Jan. 19 8-K filing that bad actors were able to access 37 million current postpaid and prepaid customer accounts (see 2301230046).
The DOJ filed a Communications Act complaint (docket 2:23-cv-00160) Monday on behalf of the FCC against U.S. Telecom Long Distance to enforce a forfeiture order it released in September 2016 assessing a $4.48 million penalty against the company for “improperly changing” consumers’ long distance carriers in a “slamming” scheme. The complaint was filed in U.S. District Court for Nevada in Las Vegas. USTLD is a non-facilities-based interexchange carrier authorized to provide service in 47 states.