Class action claims voice, face recognition software used in certain vehicles violates BIPA

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.

Vehicle voice recognition class action lawsuit overview: 

• Who: Carlos Pena filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of a minor against Cerence Inc. 
• Why: Pena claims Cerence fails to abide by Illinois biometric privacy law with the way it  collects voiceprints from users of its voice assistant and facial recognition technology equipped in automobiles. 
• Where: The class action lawsuit was filed in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois. 
• What are my options: Vehicle owners may be interested in products from Car Shield.

Multinational software and technology company Cerence violates Illinois biometric privacy law with its voice assistant and facial recognition technology for automobiles, a new class action lawsuit alleges. 

Plaintiff Carlos Pena claims, on behalf of a minor plaintiff, that Cerence’s products are integrated into more than 450 million vehicles, but that the company has failed to meet lawful obligations for a subsequent collection and storage of biometric voiceprints. 

Pena argues the technology is subject to requirements under the Illinois Biometric Privacy and Information Act (BIPA), which “protects individuals’ biometric privacy rights by regulating private entities’ collection and use of biometrics.”

“When Defendant provided its biometric-enabled technology for integration with automobiles sold and driven in Illinois, its actions triggered a number of statutory requirements under BIPA,” the Cerence class action states. 

Pena wants to represent a nationwide class of persons who have had their voiceprint biometric identifiers or biometric information collected, captured, stored, disseminated, transmitted or otherwise used by Cerence within the state of Illinois. 

Cerence improperly collects voiceprints of vehicle users, says class action

Pena argues Cerence’s software “captures, stores, and processes users’ voiceprints—the unique characteristics of their voice—for identification and verification purposes.” 

“With a voiceprint, Defendant’s software can carry out personalized responses including playing certain music, adjusting seats and climate settings, and completing online purchases,” the Cerence class action states.

Cerence, however, failed to meet requirements to publish a retention policy and destruction guidelines for the voiceprints, provide disclosures about the length of time the data would be stored, or obtain written consent prior to obtaining the voiceprints, the Cerence class action alleges. 

Plaintiffs are demanding a jury trial and requesting declaratory and injunctive relief along with an award of statutory damages for themselves and all class members. 

A similar class action lawsuit was filed against The Lip Bar last month over claims the company failed to abide by BIPA requirements with a “virtual try-on” feature on its website. 

Have you had your biometric data collected and stored by Cerence’s voice recognition software? Let us know in the comments! 

The plaintiffs are represented by Paul T. Geske, Myles McGuire, and Colin Primo Buscarini of McGuire Law, P.C. 

The Vehicle voice recognition class action lawsuit is Pena, et al. v. Cerence Inc., Case No. 1:23-cv-02667, in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois County Department, Chancery Division. 

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Indeck Power employee biometric privacy $66K class action settlement
• Illinois justices rule Biometric Information Privacy Act claims accrue with each scan
• Dynamic Manufacturing biometric privacy $1.8M class action settlement
• Vimeo, Magisto biometric privacy $2.25M class action lawsuit settlement