Jason, Jacob, and Jaz have prepared four brief posts on the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA), an old law now applied to new technology. With damages of $5,000 per violation or treble damages, CIPA lawsuits cannot be ignored. If you have a website and want to protect your company from litigation costs, check out these posts and contact us with any questions.

The California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA) penalizes unauthorized eavesdropping on communications “carried on among the parties in the presence of one another or by means of a telegraph, telephone, or other device, except a radio. . .” Cal. Penal Code § 632.7(a). Recently, plaintiffs have pressed courts to include internet-enabled communications on smartphones within the auspice of § 632.7(a). But is a smartphone communication over the internet a phone under this section of CIPA?

Courts have interpreted the plain text of § 632.7 to cover five types of telephone calls: communications transmitted between “(1) two cellular radio telephones, (2) a cellular radio telephone and a landline telephone, (3) two cordless telephones, (4) a cordless telephone and a landline telephone, and (5) a cordless telephone and a cellular radio telephone.” Missing from this list? Using a smartphone to communicate with others over the internet.

With its web-enabled capabilities and ability to access websites from the device, plaintiffs have argued that their use of a website’s chat feature on their smartphones is akin to a telephonic communication. Many California federal courts have rejected this argument (such as here, here, and here). But at least one court in the Central District of California has taken the minority approach and determined that “[s]martphones are cellular phones with web capabilities and fall within the cellular phone category.”

Ultimately, California appellate courts will need to step in and provide clarity on whether a smartphone remains a phone when used to communicate via the internet. Until then, courts (and litigants) will continue to grapple with the question: under CIPA, what is a phone?

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Jason Stiehl Jason Stiehl

Balance and comprehension are Jason Stiehl’s strengths. Splitting his practice between class action defense and trade secret protection, Jason immerses himself in the business of his clients. With a depth of understanding and appreciation for the risks and growth strategies in his clients’…

Balance and comprehension are Jason Stiehl’s strengths. Splitting his practice between class action defense and trade secret protection, Jason immerses himself in the business of his clients. With a depth of understanding and appreciation for the risks and growth strategies in his clients’ markets, he defends the assets and brands most valuable to his clients before trouble strikes.

Jason is a partner in Crowell & Moring’s Chicago office, where he is a member of the firm’s Litigation and Technology and Brand Protection groups. Jason is an experienced trial lawyer with a nationwide practice in federal and state courts focusing on complex litigation, consumer class actions, and advertising disputes. He serves clients in the retail, food and beverage, pharmaceutical and medical equipment, advertising, and technology sectors defending allegations related to consumer fraud, false labeling and deceptive practices, and Lanham Act violations. As a leading consumer class action defense lawyer, Jason also defends clients in matters involving the regulatory alphabet soup. His experience includes defense and counseling regarding the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act and the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and navigating the myriad varying state consumer protection statutes, including California’s Legal Remedies Act and the California Consumer Privacy Act.

Photo of Jacob Canter Jacob Canter

Jacob Canter is an attorney in the San Francisco office of Crowell & Moring. He is a member of the Litigation and Privacy & Cybersecurity groups. Jacob’s areas of emphasis include technology-related litigation, involving competition, cybersecurity and digital crimes, copyright, trademark, and patent…

Jacob Canter is an attorney in the San Francisco office of Crowell & Moring. He is a member of the Litigation and Privacy & Cybersecurity groups. Jacob’s areas of emphasis include technology-related litigation, involving competition, cybersecurity and digital crimes, copyright, trademark, and patent, as well as general complex commercial matters.

Jacob graduated from the University California, Berkeley School of Law in 2018, where he launched Berkeley’s election law outreach program and pro bono project. He joins the firm after a year of practice at an international law firm in Washington, D.C., and a year clerking in the Southern District of New York for the Hon. Lorna G. Schofield. Jacob was exposed to and provided support in a variety of complex substantive and procedural legal topics during the clerkship, including trade secrets, insurance/reinsurance, contracts, class actions, privacy, intellectual property, and arbitrability.

Photo of Jazmine Buckley Jazmine Buckley

Jazmine (Jaz) Buckley is an associate in Crowell & Moring’s Los Angeles office. In her litigation practice, Jaz assists companies facing complex commercial disputes in both federal and state courts and advises companies on best practices in light of potential high-stakes litigation. In

Jazmine (Jaz) Buckley is an associate in Crowell & Moring’s Los Angeles office. In her litigation practice, Jaz assists companies facing complex commercial disputes in both federal and state courts and advises companies on best practices in light of potential high-stakes litigation. In Jaz’s antitrust practice, she provides counsel on a wide range of issues and agency actions.

Jaz received her J.D. from the University of California, Los Angeles School of Law, where she was a member of UCLA Law Review and National Black Law Journal. Additionally, Jaz served as a judicial law clerk to both Magistrate Judge Gray M. Borden (N.D. Ala.) and District Court Judge Sunshine S. Sykes (C.D. Cal.).