SeatGeek: Court Should Drop CIPA Tracking Case for Failure to Allege Harm
A case charging SeatGeek violated the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA) by using tracking technologies should be dropped for failure to allege harm, argued the ticketing platform in a court document Wednesday.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Privacy Daily provides accurate coverage of newsworthy developments in data protection legislation, regulation, litigation, and enforcement for privacy professionals responsible for ensuring effective organizational data privacy compliance.
In the August complaint in case 3:25-cv-07118, plaintiff Jose Torres accuses SeatGeek of using trackers like the TikTok and Meta pixels on its website, which transmit “website users' IP addresses, unique identifiers and browsing information” to the social media platforms without user knowledge and consent, in violation of CIPA.
But Torres “alleges no harm (because none exists),” SeatGeek said Wednesday. He “does not claim he provided his personal information” on the website or conduct any activity on the site either, “such as purchasing live event tickets or signing up for an account.”
According to the ruling from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Popa v. Microsoft (see 2508270052 and 250912003), “there must be ‘more than just a statutory violation when evaluating whether a plaintiff has alleged a concrete injury,’” SeatGeek said at the U.S. District Court for Northern California.
SeatGeek further argued that the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) “allows businesses to use” the tracking technology Torres bases his claim on “without prior affirmative consent from website visitors for targeted advertising,” as long as website visitors have “the ability to opt out” of the tracking. As such, SeatGeek said it's complying with the CCPA and this provision.