Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
What Is the Appropriate Statute of Limitations Period for BIPA Claims?
Over the past three years, one of the hottest class action litigation trends in the United States has been Illinois' Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) 740 ILCS 14/1 et seq. BIPA requires entities that collect biometric information or identifiers to obtain prior written consent, provide notice of biometric privacy practices, and maintain reasonable security features to protect any collected data. Although BIPA was enacted in 2008, the law went largely unnoticed until 2016, leading many companies to unknowingly operate outside of strict compliance with the law for nearly a decade. Unfortunately, this could be a costly mistake, as BIPA provides a private right of action as well as statutory damages of up to $5,000 per violation.
At the same time, in a perfect storm for plaintiffs' attorneys, the use of biometric information grew exponentially. Aside from high-tech uses for biometric information, such as the facial recognition technology at issue in the Ninth Circuit's recent decision in Patel v. Facebook Inc., 932 F.3d 1264 (9th Cir. 2019), employers increasingly implemented biometric finger or hand print scanners to track their employees' attendance and hours. The increased use of biometric information combined with the plaintiffs' bar's discovery of a long-neglected privacy statute with a private right of action has resulted in hundreds class action lawsuits under BIPA in the last three years. The lion's share of these lawsuits have been brought by hourly employees against their employers, or ex-employers.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Why So Many Great Lawyers Stink at Business Development and What Law Firms Are Doing About It
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
A Lawyer's System for Active Reading
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
Blockchain Domains: New Developments for Brand Owners
Blockchain domain names offer decentralized alternatives to traditional DNS-based domain names, promising enhanced security, privacy and censorship resistance. However, these benefits come with significant challenges, particularly for brand owners seeking to protect their trademarks in these new digital spaces.