EPIC Amicus Curiae Briefs
EPIC frequently files amicus curiae, or "friend of the court", briefs in federal and state appellate cases concerning emerging privacy and civil liberties issues.
We work closely with technical experts and legal scholars, members of the EPIC Advisory Board, on these briefs. EPIC's amicus briefs assist judges in their analyses of novel privacy issues, often involving new technology. Many of these cases are complex and technical. Judges often acknowledge EPIC's briefs in their opinions, and have expressed gratitude for EPIC's participation in important cases. EPIC's decision to participate as amicus in a particular case typically follows an extensive review of matters pending before federal and state courts.
Interested in potential amicus opportunities in pending privacy, civil liberties, and technology cases? Visit the EPIC Amicus Tracker.
Search results for: Consumer Privacy
Attorney General v. Facebook SJC-12946
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court | Consumer PrivacyWhether the Attorney General can obtain from Facebook factual information derived from the company's investigation of third parties that improperly accessed user data.
Smith v. LoanMe No. S260391
California Supreme Court | Consumer PrivacyWhether the California Invasion of Privacy Act prohibits parties to a call from recording a call without the consent of all parties
LinkedIn v. hiQ Labs No. 19-1116
Supreme Court | Consumer PrivacyWhether a court can compel an internet company to provide third-party data scrapers access to user data.
United States v. Facebook No. 19-2184
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia | Consumer PrivacyWhether the proposed settlement between the FTC and Facebook for violations of the 2011 Consent Order does not serve the public interest and should be rejected
Attias v. Carefirst (Carefirst II) 19-7020
U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit | Consumer PrivacyWhether victims of a data breach have adequately alleged damages
Frank v. Gaos 139 S.Ct. 1041
Supreme Court | Consumer PrivacyWhether a settlement is “fair, reasonable, and adequate†in a consumer privacy case where there is no meaningful change in business practices and no monetary relief is given to class members.
Rosenbach v. Six Flags 2017 IL App (2d) 170317
Illinois Supreme Court | Consumer PrivacyWhether an individual whose biometric data has been unlawfully collected in violation of the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act has a cause of action
In re: Facebook, Inc. Internet Tracking Litigation 17-17486
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | Consumer PrivacyWhether Facebook violated the privacy rights of users by tracking their web browsing history even after they logged out of the platform
Herrick v. Grindr, LLC 765 Fed.Appx. 586
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit | Consumer privacyWhether § 230 of the Communications Decency Act shields Grindr, a dating app, from liability for failing to remove fake profiles that used the Plaintiff’s name and likeness and posed a danger to his personal safety
Campbell v. Facebook 17-16873
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | Consumer PrivacyWhether the lower court erred in approving a proposed class action settlement that allowed Facebook to continue scanning private messages as long as the company posts a notice about the practice in its privacy policy
In re: Google Cookie Placement Settlement 934 F.3d 316 (3d Cir. 2019)
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | Consumer PrivacyWhether the lower court erred in approving a proposed class action settlement in the Google "cookie placement" litigation that did not provide direct relief to class members and would distribute funds to groups with prior connections to Google and class counsel.
hiQ Labs v. LinkedIn Corp. 938 F.3d 985 (9th Cir. 2019)
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | Consumer PrivacyWhether a court can compel a professional networking platform to provide access to users’ profile information to a third-party data mining company
Smith v. Facebook 745 Fed. Appx. 8 (9th Cir. Dec. 6, 2018)
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | Consumer PrivacyWhether Facebook's tracking of users' visits to medical websites violates California and Federal privacy laws
Smith v. LexisNexis Screening Solutions 837 F.3d 604 (6th Cir. 2016)
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit | Consumer PrivacyConcerning the Standard of Care for Data Brokers Providing Employment Background Checks
FTC v. Wyndham 799 F.3d 236 (3d Cir. 2015)
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit | Consumer PrivacyWhether the FTC can enforce data security standards under its Section 5 "unfairness" authority
Fraley v. Facebook 638 Fed. Appx. 594 (9th Cir. 2016)
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | Consumer PrivacyWhether Facebook's proposed settlement of privacy claims arising from "Sponsored Stories" advertisements is fair and sufficient for class members
NCTA v. FCC 555 F.3d 996 (D.C. Cir. 2009)
U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit | Consumer PrivacyConcerning Privacy of Customer Proprietary Network Information (CPNI)
Paramount Pictures v. ReplayTV CV 01-09358 FMC
Central District of California | Consumer PrivacyConcerning Electronic Surveillance of TV Usage
Filters
Keyword
Issue
- Fourth Amendment (30)
- Consumer Privacy (18)
- Standing (11)
- First Amendment (11)
- Freedom of Information Act (8)
- Telephone Consumer Protection Act (7)
- Electronic Communications Privacy Act (6)
- Drivers Privacy Protection Act (5)
- Informational Privacy (5)
- Video Privacy Protection Act (3)
- Census (3) View more »
