Ring class action claims website eavesdrops on visitor communications in real time

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.

Ring website class action lawsuit overview: 

• Who: Annette Cody filed a class action lawsuit against Ring LLC. 
• Why: Cody claims Ring secretly and unlawfully wiretaps the private conversations of individuals who use the chat feature on its website. 
• Where: The class action lawsuit was filed in California federal court. 

Ring covertly wiretaps the personal conversations of consumers who use the chat feature on its website, a new class action lawsuit alleges. 

Plaintiff Annette Cody claims Ring fails to obtain its website visitors’ consent prior to allegedly wiretapping their communication on its chat feature.

Cody argues Ring also allows at least one third to eavesdrop — in real time — on the allegedly wiretapped conversations of its website visitors. 

“Defendant has covertly embedded code into its chat feature that automatically records and creates transcripts of all such conversations,” the Ring class action states. 

Cody wants to represent a nationwide class of consumers who have visited Ring’s website and had their electronic communications recorded, stored and/or shared without their prior express consent.

Ring violated law by failing to obtain consent prior to wiretapping website visitors, class action says 

Ring is violating the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA) by not obtaining consent before allegedly wiretapping and allowing eavesdropping of its website visitors’ conversations, the Ring class action alleges. 

“The (CIPA) prohibits both wiretapping and eavesdropping of electronic communications without the consent of all parties to the communication,” the Ring class action states. 

Cody argues compliance with CIPA is “easy” and that the “vast majority” of other website operators are able to follow the law by “conspicuously warning visitors when their conversations are being recorded or if third parties are eavesdropping on them.” 

“Unlike most companies, Defendant ignores CIPA. Instead, Defendant both wiretaps the conversations of all website visitors and allows a third party to eavesdrop on the conversations in real time during transmission,” the Ring class action states. 

Plaintiff is demanding a jury trial and requesting declaratory and injunctive relief along with an award of statutory and punitive damages for herself and all class members. 

A similar class action lawsuit was filed against LoanDepot earlier this month by a consumer arguing the company used software to secretly wiretap its website visitors’ keystrokes and electronic communications. 

Have you had your electronic communications recorded and/or shared without your consent? Let us know in the comments. 

The plaintiff is represented by Scott J. Ferrell of Pacific Trial Attorneys APC. 

The Ring website class action lawsuit is Cody, et al. v. Ring LLC, et al., Case No. 3:23-cv-00562, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Margaritaville class action claims company sends unsolicited telemarketing text messages
• Humana class action claims company makes prerecorded promotional messages without consent
• SmileDirectClub telemarketing $2.95M class action settlement
• LoanDepot class action claims website records visitors’ keystrokes, website interactions