Conde Nast class action lawsuit overview:
- Who: A California federal judge denied Conde Nast Digital’s motion to dismiss a class action lawsuit filed by a consumer.
- Why: The consumer claims Conde Nast installed trackers on its websites that collect users’ personal information without their consent.
- Where: The Conde Nast class action lawsuit was filed in California federal court.
A California federal judge on Sept. 4 denied Conde Nast Digital’s motion to dismiss a class action lawsuit claiming the media company collects users’ personal information without their consent.
Plaintiff Aaron Deivaprakash filed the Conde Nast class action lawsuit in California federal court, claiming the company’s websites, newyorker.com and wired.com, install trackers on users’ browsers that collect their personal information and track their internet activity without their consent.
The trackers allow third-party advertisers to compile comprehensive profiles of users, which are then sold to advertisers for targeted ads, the web tracking lawsuit alleges.
Deivaprakash claims he visited Conde Nast’s websites multiple times between 2012 and 2024 and was tracked without his knowledge or consent.
The plaintiff argues Conde Nast violated the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA) by installing the trackers without a court order.
Conde Nast argued the trackers do not qualify as “pen registers” under CIPA because they do not record or decode information but simply instruct browsers to transmit the information to third parties.
The company also argued the trackers collect more than just dialing, routing, addressing or signaling information, and that users voluntarily share the information with third parties.
Conde Nast allegedly embedded trackers in its websites and stored users’ information
District Judge Rita Lin, however, found Deivaprakash sufficiently alleged the trackers recorded and stored users’ information, including cookies that uniquely identify each user.
She also found Deivaprakash adequately alleged Conde Nast used the trackers by embedding them in its websites, which allowed third parties to compile detailed profiles of users.
Lin rejected Conde Nast’s argument that Deivaprakash did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the information collected, finding the privacy violation extended beyond the collection of his IP address and metadata to the creation of a detailed profile and his reduced capacity to remain anonymous online.
The judge also found Conde Nast’s installation of the trackers caused Deivaprakash’s privacy injury, as the trackers provided the addressing information used in building the third parties’ profiles.
Lin concluded the application of the CIPA to the allegations in the Conde Nast class action lawsuit did not require the interpretation of any ambiguities in the statute.
She denied Conde Nast’s motion to dismiss, allowing the class action to proceed.
Recently, several dermatology clinics were sued for collecting users’ personal data without consent. If you believe your privacy was violated by a dermatology or aesthetic clinic’s website or emails you may qualify for a class action lawsuit investigation.
What do you think about the allegations made in this Conde Nast class action lawsuit? Tell us in the comments.
The plaintiff is represented by L. Timothy Fisher, Philip L. Fraietta and Joshua R. Wilner of Bursor & Fisher P.A.
The Conde Nast class action lawsuit is Deivaprakash v. Conde Nast Digital, Case No. 3:25-cv-04021, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
Don’t Miss Out!
Check out our list of Class Action Lawsuits and Class Action Settlements you may qualify to join!
Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:
- Costco recalls exploding Prosecco bottles and Dubai chocolates over safety concerns
- Mazda class action alleges CX-90 vehicles have defective brakes
- TransUnion class action lawsuit alleges data breach compromised PII of 4.4M
- Fandango hit with class action over hidden ‘convenience fees’ on movie tickets
