Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.
On Nov. 13, a federal judge refused to toss an email harvesting class action lawsuit filed against the internet company LinkedIn Corp., ruling the popular social media business could not claim immunity under the Communications Decency Act (CDA). The proposed LinkedIn class action lawsuit alleges the company broke into LinkedIn users’ personal accounts in order to send emails on the users’ behalf.
In addition to denying immunity to LinkedIn, U.S. District Judge Lucy H. Koh also disagreed with the company’s argument that the alleged email harvesting was protected under the First Amendment.
According to Judge Koh’s order to partially deny LinkedIn’s motion to the dismiss the email harvesting class action lawsuit, “Plaintiffs have plausibly alleged that the reminder emails, just like the initial invitation email, function as advertisements for LinkedIn. … The Court has already said so, finding that Plaintiffs sufficiently alleged for Article III standing purposes that their names had been ‘used to endorse or advertise a product to [their] friends and contacts.’”
Therefore, these alleged email harvesting practices may count as misleading commercial speech, which is not protected under the First Amendment as LinkedIn has proposed.
The LinkedIn email harvesting class action lawsuit was originally filed in 2013 by lead plaintiff Paul Perkins who alleged LinkedIn would advertise its website’s services to nonmembers by breaking into LinkedIn users’ third-party email addresses. After this was allegedly achieved, Perkins alleges LinkedIn would then download or harvest the emails users’ stored contacts and send out emails promoting LinkedIn on the users’ behalf.
Perkins and the other plaintiffs in this email harvesting class action lawsuit are all working professionals who currently use, or have used, LinkedIn and claim that the employment-focused social media website does not provide users with an option to cease future ad emails from being sent to their contacts on their behalf.
In regards to LinkedIn’s claim that the company could be provided immunity under the CDA, Judge Koh ruled that the CDA only provides immunity to an “interactive computer service provider” not an “information content provider” such as LinkedIn.
In the LinkedIn email harvesting class action lawsuit, Judge Koh stated, “LinkedIn, plaintiffs say, generated the text, layout and design of the reminder emails and sent them to hundreds if not thousands of recipients. Because, as plaintiffs allege, LinkedIn sent the reminder emails without plaintiffs’ knowledge or consent, the text and layout of these emails were created by LinkedIn without any input from the user.”
While Judge Koh has dismissed most of the claims in the LinkedIn email harvesting class action lawsuit, the social media internet service has prevailed on one count. The judge did dismiss plaintiffs’ claims under California’s statutory right of publicity, however, the plaintiffs have been granted permission to amend their complaints under this statute.
The plaintiffs are represented by Larry C. Russ, Dorian S. Berger and Daniel P. Hipskind of Russ August & Kabat.
The LinkedIn Email Harvesting Class Action Lawsuit is Perkins, et al. v. LinkedIn Corp., Case No. 5:13-cv-04303, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
UPDATE: On June 11, 2015, LinkedIn informed a California federal judge that it had agreed to pay $13 million to settle the email harvesting class action lawsuit.
UPDATE 2: The LinkedIn email harvesting class action lawsuit was preliminarily approved on Sept. 15, 2015.
UPDATE 3: Details on how to file a claim for the LinkedIn Add Connections class action settlement are up! See them here.
UPDATE 4/20/16: The LinkedIn Add Connections Class Action Settlement is currently under appeal. Claims will not be paid until all appeals are exhausted. We appreciate your ongoing patience. Top Class Actions will continue to provide updates as we learn more. Keep checking back and let us know when you receive a check in the comments section below or on our Facebook page.
UPDATE 5: On Oct. 17, 2016, Top Class Actions readers who submitted valid claims for theLinkedIn add connections class action settlementstarted receiving checks worth as much as $20.43! Congratulations to all our viewers who got PAID!
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING
Top Class Actions is a Proud Member of the American Bar Association
LEGAL INFORMATION IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE
Top Class Actions Legal Statement
©2008 – 2024 Top Class Actions® LLC
Various Trademarks held by their respective owners
This website is not intended for viewing or usage by European Union citizens.
5 thoughts onJudge Won’t Dismiss LinkedIn Email Harvesting Class Action Lawsuit
UPDATE 5: On Oct. 17, 2016, Top Class Actions readers who submitted valid claims for the LinkedIn add connections class action settlement started receiving checks worth as much as $20.43! Congratulations to all our viewers who got PAID!
UPDATE 4/20/16: The LinkedIn Add Connections Class Action Settlement is currently under appeal. Claims will not be paid until all appeals are exhausted. We appreciate your ongoing patience. Top Class Actions will continue to provide updates as we learn more. Keep checking back and let us know when you receive a check in the comments section below or on our Facebook page.
none of the links work to file a claim?
UPDATE: The LinkedIn email harvesting class action lawsuit was preliminarily approved on Sept. 15, 2015.
UPDATE: On June 11, 2015, LinkedIn informed a California federal judge that it had agreed to pay $13 million to settle the email harvesting class action lawsuit.