In a Challenge to California Privacy Law, IBM Defends Lawsuit Against Weather Channel App

With the lack of an all-encompassing federal privacy law to address the sale, use, and gathering of consumers’ personal data, many states have enacted their own privacy laws.  And as usual, California passed the most stringent consumer privacy statute with many experts lauding its provisions.  But earlier this month, IBM became the first technology giant to truly test and challenge the California Privacy Law statute by fighting against it in a lawsuit brought against its Weather Channel mobile application. 

The Weather Channel App Lawsuit Becomes a Challenge to California Privacy Law

In California, the L.A. City Attorney’s Office brought suit against IBM’s Weather Channel application under allegations that it had violated the California Consumer Privacy Act because the application was collecting privacy geolocation data from its users and selling said data for profit.  In response to the suit, IBM submitted a motion for summary judgment stating that users had been informed of such use and sale when they agreed to use the application.   

IBM claims that although the disclosures were not front and center on any landing page in the mobile application, the disclosures had always been available on the Weather Channel application’s privacy policy page on the Internet.  In other words, IBM maintains there was disclosure available for any user to easily obtain. 

IBM Claims Misinterpretation and Overstepping

IBM argues that the L.A. City Attorney’s Office is basically requiring additional disclosures to be made and trying to dictate where those disclosures happen.  IBM argues that the California Consumer Privacy Act neither requires that the disclosures be made in such a manner nor does it grant city attorney’s offices such power.  

As a result, IBM further argues that the L.A. City Attorney’s Office is well overstepping the requirements of both the California Online Privacy Protection Act and the California Consumer Privacy Act, two statutes considered to already be more stringent than most privacy laws.   

IBM then went on to file another motion for summary judgment stating no proof of substantial injuries occurring were shown, and as such, the court should steer clear of treating such alleged injuries as substantial because it could lead to a slippery slope of such subjective claims and have a chilling effect on future legislation. 

Key Takeaways from IBM’s Challenge to California Privacy Law

IBM is the first technology giant to take on California’s consumer privacy statutes after a lawsuit was brought against IBM’s Weather Channel application. IBM is challenging the privacy law statute with the filing of two motions for summary judgment claiming that:

• disclosures had been properly made as required under the California law;

• having disclosures made on a separate website as opposed to within the mobile application was legal;

• the California statutes do not mandate where privacy disclosures regarding mobile applications have to be made; and

• the city attorney’s office was unable to make a showing of any substantial injuries caused by the Weather Channel’s application’s actions.

For more insights on data privacy, see our Intellectual Property Litigation Overview and Consumer Products Industry Legal Solutions pages.

You may also be interested in: