Spyware Lawsuit Against Kim Kardashian’s SKIMS Settled

The legal drama that had overshadowed the celebrity shapewear brands’ otherwise stellar financial performance has finally been resolved.

Spyware Lawsuit Against Kim Kardashian's SKIMS Settled

The legal drama that had overshadowed the celebrity shapewear brands' otherwise stellar financial performance has finally been resolved. Thanks to their agreement, the lawsuit against Kardashian's brand will be dismissed within 45 days after the April 5, 2024 settlement date. The allegations were serious, suggesting that SKIMS had unjustly targeted and collected data on its customers, leading to claims of invasion of privacy.

This class-action suit, filed in the Northern District of California on May 3, 2024, accused SKIMS of using Meta Pixel technology to eavesdrop on website visitors' communications as they searched for intimate wear products. Led by plaintiffs Catherine Porchia and Mathilda Silverstein, alleges that SKIMS has been using Meta's Tracking Pixel technology to intercept and collect user data without their consent.

According to court documents, claimed that SKIMS used "secretly deployed spyware" to access her device and place a "trap and trace" tracking software. This software purportedly captured electronic impulses from the site, identifying the source of communication, including the identity and geolocation of every website visitor. This technology, designed to help brands assess the efficacy of their advertisements, allegedly enabled Meta to collect data on consumers without their consent.

Spyware Lawsuit Against Kim Kardashian's SKIMS Settled
Credit: SKIMS website

It's also alleged that a Meta's Tracking Pixel, a snippet of code was embedded into the SKIMS website. This pixel tracks users' interactions with the site, capturing data such as search queries and product views. According to the plaintiffs, this data is then transmitted to Meta, allowing the tech giant to analyze and utilize it for targeted advertising and other purposes. The plaintiffs argue that this practice constitutes wiretapping and eavesdropping, violating sections 631(a) and 632 of the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA), prohibiting third-party wiretapping and recording confidential communications without consent.

The lawsuit further contends that SKIMS' cookie banner, which offers users the option to "Opt Out of Third-Party Targeting Cookies," is insufficient. The plaintiffs argue that the banner is located at the bottom of the screen and does not require user engagement to proceed with using the website, rendering it a "non-binding browsewrap." Even when users opt out of third-party targeting cookies, the complaint alleges, SKIMS continues to share personal browsing data and identifiers with Meta.

This case is part of a broader trend of CIPA-centric class action litigation, which has seen an uptick in recent years. Courts, including the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, have increasingly found that using third-party entities to collect website visitors' information without their consent could violate state wiretapping statutes. The plaintiffs were seeking certification of their proposed class action, injunctive relief, and damages exceeding $5 million, exclusive of interest and costs, for the affected consumers.

Despite the gravity of these accusations, the lawsuit was settled unconditionally. Legal documents revealed that the settlement would lead to the dismissal of the case. It remains unclear if the settlement involved monetary compensation, but the filing emphasized that the agreement was unconditional, ending the legal dispute.

However, the legal issues surrounding SKIMS have not been limited to the spyware allegations. The brand has faced other controversies, including accusations of copying designs and disputes with employees over unpaid wages. For instance, housekeepers sued Kardashian, claiming they were promised full-time jobs with benefits but were instead classified as independent contractors, receiving no benefits.

The implications of this lawsuit extend beyond SKIMS and Meta. It raises critical questions about consumer privacy and the extent to which companies can track and utilize user data without explicit consent. Many consumers remain unaware of the extent to which their online activities are monitored, and this case highlights the need for greater transparency and stricter regulations regarding data collection practices.

View Comments (0)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.