Flosports sued in consumer privacy class action

tikk10

Well-Known Member
Nov 6, 2015
6,037
17,883
1
Since Flotigation is evidently my side-beat, I give to you the following.

Case 1:22-cv-11502-AK
CHRISTOPHER J. FIORENTINO, [and those similarly situated] v. FLOSPORTS, INC.
US District Court of Massachusetts, Eastern Div.

Flo was sued by a Facebook user and Flo subscriber in a consumer privacy class action for "knowingly disclosing its digital subscribers' identities" in violation of the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA), 18 U.S.C. § 2710, which prohibits "video tape service providers" such as FloSports from "knowingly disclos[ing]" consumers' PII."

Specifically, Flo installs a "Facebook Pixel" on its site, without telling its users/subscribers, and then discloses to Facebook its subscribers' identities and their viewing activities, without their consent.

Plaintiff is seeking liquidated damages in the amount of $2,500 per violation, plus fees and costs. Because this is a class action, plaintiff is effectively seeking the same deal for everyone similarly affected, which I imagine would include a lot of you (anyone with both a Flo and FB subscription who has watched Flo videos).

This lawsuit is essentially a template of numerous other lawsuits dating back at least 5 years that I can see, and from what I can tell they all settle and are successful, which inference I draw from the fact that these suits are still being filed. The practice of using a Facebook Pixel to help FB (and your own business) data mine is fairly common, and websites that do this could easily launder their liability in appropriately drafted Terms of Service. But since Flo is a fly-by-night operation, it shouldn't surprise when they're caught out playing fast and loose instead of simply obtaining the requisite consent.

Willie budget: $1m. Compliance budget: $0. Priorities.

In all likelihood, we're not all going to get thousands of dollars out of this, and Flo will settle quietly like everyone else seems to do. You might one day receive a card in the mail informing you that you get a free month of Flo or something. Flo will update its ToS eventually to comply with the law and that'll be that.
 

El-Jefe

Well-Known Member
Jul 27, 2012
26,682
56,953
1
Willie's response:

tenor.gif
 

creamery freak

Well-Known Member
Jul 26, 2014
1,957
4,335
1
Since Flotigation is evidently my side-beat, I give to you the following.

Case 1:22-cv-11502-AK
CHRISTOPHER J. FIORENTINO, [and those similarly situated] v. FLOSPORTS, INC.
US District Court of Massachusetts, Eastern Div.

Flo was sued by a Facebook user and Flo subscriber in a consumer privacy class action for "knowingly disclosing its digital subscribers' identities" in violation of the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA), 18 U.S.C. § 2710, which prohibits "video tape service providers" such as FloSports from "knowingly disclos[ing]" consumers' PII."

Specifically, Flo installs a "Facebook Pixel" on its site, without telling its users/subscribers, and then discloses to Facebook its subscribers' identities and their viewing activities, without their consent.

Plaintiff is seeking liquidated damages in the amount of $2,500 per violation, plus fees and costs. Because this is a class action, plaintiff is effectively seeking the same deal for everyone similarly affected, which I imagine would include a lot of you (anyone with both a Flo and FB subscription who has watched Flo videos).

This lawsuit is essentially a template of numerous other lawsuits dating back at least 5 years that I can see, and from what I can tell they all settle and are successful, which inference I draw from the fact that these suits are still being filed. The practice of using a Facebook Pixel to help FB (and your own business) data mine is fairly common, and websites that do this could easily launder their liability in appropriately drafted Terms of Service. But since Flo is a fly-by-night operation, it shouldn't surprise when they're caught out playing fast and loose instead of simply obtaining the requisite consent.

Willie budget: $1m. Compliance budget: $0. Priorities.

In all likelihood, we're not all going to get thousands of dollars out of this, and Flo will settle quietly like everyone else seems to do. You might one day receive a card in the mail informing you that you get a free month of Flo or something. Flo will update its ToS eventually to comply with the law and that'll be that.
All the more reason tikk for you to share your flo password with the board. 🙂
 

tikk10

Well-Known Member
Nov 6, 2015
6,037
17,883
1
Here's Flo's response, a motion to dismiss for failing to state a claim. It's short but they're saying that the plaintiff has no standing because he failed to show how *he* was injured, instead relying on evidence from a dummy account the lawyers created to demonstrate what Flo was doing. There's a lot of snark about the dummy account.

Flo's argument isn't good because the complaint does exactly what they say it doesn't do...

42. FloSports disclosed to Facebook Mr. Fiorentino’s FID coupled with the title of the videos he requested or obtained and the URLs to access those videos.

43. Each time Defendant disclosed his PII to Facebook, it violated his rights under the VPPA.


Plus, you don't have to prove your case in your complaint, you only need to make the claim. The nature of this type of claim necessitates discovery of technical documents that the plaintiff wouldn't be naturally privy to.

 

Raw Daddy

Well-Known Member
Nov 16, 2014
614
991
1
Here's Flo's response, a motion to dismiss for failing to state a claim. It's short but they're saying that the plaintiff has no standing because he failed to show how *he* was injured, instead relying on evidence from a dummy account the lawyers created to demonstrate what Flo was doing. There's a lot of snark about the dummy account.

Flo's argument isn't good because the complaint does exactly what they say it doesn't do...

42. FloSports disclosed to Facebook Mr. Fiorentino’s FID coupled with the title of the videos he requested or obtained and the URLs to access those videos.

43. Each time Defendant disclosed his PII to Facebook, it violated his rights under the VPPA.


Plus, you don't have to prove your case in your complaint, you only need to make the claim. The nature of this type of claim necessitates discovery of technical documents that the plaintiff wouldn't be naturally privy to.

Motion deeeeeenied
 

Latest posts