The National Law Journal with DC News from Legal Times

30 Day Free Trial

National News
Washington News
  • Home
  • Legal Business
  • Law Schools
  • Columns
  • Verdicts
  • Opinion
  • Video Center
  • Blog

NLJ Home > News > Privacy suit accuses Google, Viacom of feeding 'cookies' to children

Font Size: increase font decrease font

Privacy suit accuses Google, Viacom of feeding 'cookies' to children

By Sheri Qualters Contact All Articles 

The National Law Journal

December 26, 2012

  •    
  •    
  •    
  •      
 
Fenwick & West's Jed Wakefield

Fenwick & West's Jed Wakefield

Attorneys have filed a proposed class action against Google Inc. and Viacom Inc. for allegedly tracking children's Internet use after they visited two Viacom websites. The complaint alleges violations of Video Privacy Protection Act and the Wiretap Act, plus intrusion upon seclusion and unjust enrichment.

K.T. v. Viacom, filed on December 21 in the Western District of Pennsylvania, alleges the use of so-called "cookies" — computer code that allow websites to track visitors' subsequent Internet use. It seeks preliminary and permanent injunctions and unspecified damages.

The complaint argues that Viacom knowingly allows Google to track young children's use of its sites and that both companies profit by the practice.

The complaint identifies the lead plaintiff as a child under 13 years of age who lives in Jeannette, Pa. The websites in question, the document says, are www.nick.com and www.nickjr.com.

The plaintiff's lawyers at Pittsburgh-based Campbell & Levine did not respond to requests for comment. Google and Viacom apparently have not yet selected lawyers in the case. Google spokesman Chris Gaither said the company hadn't been served and would have no comment. Viacom did not respond.

Except for the plaintiff's age, "this lawsuit looks like a number of lawsuits involving cookies used in connection with Internet browsers," said Jed Wakefield, a San Francisco litigation partner at Fenwick & West of Mountain View, Calif. Wakefield handles privacy and intellectual property cases for technology companies, but isn't involved in this case.

Most similar claims regarding adult Internet users don't survive motion to dismiss, he said; the courts cited failure to prove any injury.

Wakefield speculated that the proposed class comprises children under 13 because the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, which took effect in 2000, governs the online collection of information of children under that age. But there's no private cause of action under that law, he said, noting that the class isn't attempting to bring such a claim.

"It would appear that the plaintiffs are trying to borrow from the concept of that law and apply it to laws that are completely different, such as wiretap laws an video privacy laws. It's a novel approach," Wakefield said.

Sheri Qualters can be contacted at squalters@alm.com.

 



Subscribe to The National Law Journal

You must be signed in to comment on an article

Find similar content

Firms mentioned

    
  • Fenwick & West

Companies, agencies mentioned

    
  • Children
  • Viacom Inc.
  • Google Inc.

Key categories

    
  • Information Security

Most viewed stories

    
  1. Judge Strikes Law Banning Demonstrations at Supreme Court
    •      
  2. NLJ 350 Regional Report: The Hot Markets, and the Cold
    •      
  3. Study Details Obstacles Confronting Minority Law Students
    •      
  4. Largest State Poised to Require Practical Skills Training
    •      
  5. Supreme Court Voids Human Gene Patents
    •      
lawjobs.com

TOP JOBS

MORE JOBS

POST A JOB

From the Law.com Network

In-House Counsel Go to Privacy Boot Camp

In-House Changes at News Corp Ahead of Corporate Split

Proskauer, Former CFO Settle Bias Suit

Global Firms Cope With Istanbul Unrest

D.C. Circuit Nominations a Defining Moment

D.C. Circuit Nominees Widely Respected Within the Bar

Nine Tips to Avoid Starring in a Spreadsheet Horror Story

Snapshot: Tom Gelbmann

The Recorder 25: California Golden Again for Many Firms
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Capital Accounts: Judicial Branch's Brothers Don't See Eye to Eye
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Miami Photographer Sues Pop Star Justin Bieber
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Jeremy Alters Settles With Argentinian Firm For $1 Million
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Alcotest Should Be Discontinued Right Away, DWI Lawyers Say

Lawyer's Fudging of HUD Forms Draws Supreme Court Censure
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Affordable State-Specific Practice Solution
Available in NY, NJ, PA and CT editions - research, draft and prepare even the most complex cases with ease.

Restaurant in Union Square Park Ruled Permissible
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Magistrate Judge Finds Few Benefits to Class in Settlement
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Third Circuit Could See Rise in Pay-for-Delay Litigation

Cozen Debt Forgiveness Is Campaign Contribution, Court Says
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Sorry, Charlie, Your Wife Won't Support You

Top Reasons to Take Your Husband's Name

Interim Dean Named at Texas Wesleyan University School of Law
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Water Works: H2O Kept Lawyer-Lobbyists Busy
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Boosting Lawyers And Saving Lives
  •      
    • Subscription Required

11th Circuit Conflicted On Juveniles Stance
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Chimp Attack Victim Is Denied $150M State Lawsuit

Auto Body Case May Lead To CUTPA Reassessment

 
  • About The National Law Journal   |
  • Contact The National Law Journal   |
  • Advertise with Us   |
  • Sitemap
  • About |
  • ALM Properties |
  • ALM Reprints |
  • Customer Support |
  • Privacy Policy (updated 6/14/13) |
  • Terms & Conditions |
  • ALM User License Agreement
ALM Media