A case currently making its way through the Supreme Court’s docket may have far-reaching implications for the future of privacy litigation. While the case, Frank v. Gaos, concerns cy pres class-action settlements and their appropriateness, another issue has captured the court’s attention: Article III standing, and, specifically, whether the plaintiffs in the case pleaded sufficient concrete harm. IAPP Westin Fellow Mitchell Noordyke, CIPP/E, CIPP/US, writes in this Privacy Tracker post, "Buried in the nuanced discussions about current standing quandaries ... is an important question: Are search terms plus an IP address individually identifying and is their mere disclosure a concrete harm? If the answer is yes, the implications for privacy litigation are immense."
If you want to comment on this post, you need to login.