Legal Insights
Articles
Legal Analysis
How Santa Clara County v. Meta Strengthens Privacy Claims Against Individual Websites
James Chung, Esq., Managing Partner, Pro Veritas Law LLP · May 12, 2026 · 6 minutes read read
The Santa Clara County lawsuit against Meta doesn't just target a tech giant. It establishes a direct link between pixel data collection and documented consumer harm — strengthening the legal foundation for claims against every website in Meta's tracking network.
Legal Insights
After Notice: Why Continued Tracking Carries Escalating Legal Risk
James Chung, Esq., Managing Partner, Pro Veritas Law LLP · May 12, 2026 · 5 minutes read read
When a website operator receives specific notice of privacy violations and continues deploying tracking technologies unchanged, the legal risk transforms from potential oversight to documented willful conduct.
Legal Insights
The Weakest Link: How Individual Websites Feed Meta's Data Collection Network
James Chung, Esq., Managing Partner, Pro Veritas Law LLP · May 12, 2026 · 5 minutes read read
Meta's data collection empire doesn't start at Meta. It starts on millions of independent websites that embed the Meta Pixel — quietly transmitting visitor data into one of the largest targeting systems ever built.
Legal Insights
Meta's Digital Betrayal: How Platform Tracking Fuels Billions in Scam Revenue
James Chung, Esq., Managing Partner, Pro Veritas Law LLP · May 12, 2026 · 5 minutes read read
Santa Clara County's landmark lawsuit accuses Meta of knowingly profiting from billions in scam advertisements — powered by the same tracking pixels that intercept user data on millions of websites.
The legal landscape around digital privacy and web accessibility is rapidly evolving. Courts across the country are increasingly holding businesses accountable for unauthorized data collection, privacy violations, and accessibility barriers on their websites. The following recent decisions illustrate the growing strength of consumer protection enforcement in the areas where our firm practices.
Privacy Law (CIPA)
Mikulsky v. Bloomingdale's
9th Circuit, June 2025
The Ninth Circuit reversed dismissal of CIPA claims, holding that a plaintiff sufficiently alleged the defendant aided third-party session replay providers in capturing website visitors' names, addresses, credit card information, and product selections without consent.
Camplisson v. Adidas America, Inc.
S.D. Cal., November 2025
Court allowed CIPA pen register claims to proceed, finding that website tracking pixels plausibly constituted illegal pen registers. The court noted that a privacy policy link in the footer was insufficient to establish consent.
Shah v. Fandom, Inc.
N.D. Cal., October 2024
Court denied motion to dismiss CIPA pen register claims, holding that IP address information collected by third-party trackers constituted 'addressing information' under the statute.
Moody v. C2 Education Systems
C.D. Cal., July 2024
Court refused to dismiss pen register claims, holding that TikTok fingerprinting software could qualify as a pen register under CIPA.
Video Privacy (VPPA)
Lee v. Springer Nature America
S.D.N.Y., 2025
Court approved a $900,000 class settlement for VPPA violations where Scientific American's website disclosed subscribers' Facebook IDs and viewing history to Meta via the Meta Pixel without consent.
Salazar v. National Basketball Association
2d Circuit, 2024
Landmark appellate ruling expanded the definition of 'consumer' under the VPPA, holding that signing up for a free email newsletter was sufficient to establish standing.
Gardner v. Me-TV National Limited Partnership
7th Circuit, 2025
Expanded VPPA liability by holding that plaintiffs who created free accounts to access personalized video features qualified as consumers under the statute.
Fubo VPPA Class Action Settlement
July 2025
Fubo agreed to pay $3.4M to settle class action for sharing users' video viewing history with third parties via tracking pixels, violating VPPA, CIPA, and California Civil Code § 1799.3.
Accessibility (ADA/Unruh)
Frasco v. Flo Health, Inc.
N.D. Cal., 2025
Court certified a California subclass for claims brought under CIPA § 632, demonstrating courts' willingness to certify classes in digital privacy cases.