DES MOINES, Iowa鈥� A federal judge has refused to dismiss a lawsuit alleging an Iowa newspaper publisher violated customers鈥� privacy rights through information sharing with Facebook.
The Iowa-based newspaper chain Lee Enterprises, owner of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, is facing alleging it has shared readers鈥� personal information, including the videos they watch on Lee websites, with Facebook in violation of federal law. , arguing that individuals鈥� Facebook IDs were not transmitted directly from Lee to Facebook without the individuals having already signed onto Facebook.
U.S. District Judge Stephen Locher characterized the positions of the two parties by comparing them to a transaction at 鈥渁n erstwhile brick-and-mortar video store.鈥� Lee鈥檚 position, the judge said, is that the information sharing was like a consumer who invites a friend to join him at the counter of the video store, where the friend can clearly see which videos the consumer has rented. The company is saying the information sharing 鈥渨as primary a consequence of the consumer鈥檚 own actions,鈥� the judge summarized.
The judge, however, rejected Lee鈥檚 argument, siding with the plaintiffs in the case who argue that Lee implemented use of Facebook tracking software 鈥� part of which is called 鈥渢he Facebook Pixel鈥� 鈥� and then opted not to warn consumers that it had done so.
Locher noted that Congress passed federal privacy laws after a newspaper reporter obtained information about Judge Robert Bork鈥檚 video-rental history during hearings for Bork鈥檚 unsuccessful nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court in the late 1980s.
鈥淟ee鈥檚 use of the Facebook Pixel is therefore arguably analogous to a brick-and-mortar video store鈥檚 use of glass windows near the cash register,鈥� Locher ruled in his July 20 decision allowing the case to proceed. 鈥淵es, the glass windows might allow a bystander to see which videos are being rented by someone the bystander already knows; but, no, this is not the harm Congress was trying to redress. There is, however, an alternative analogy that might be more apt.
鈥淧erhaps the situation is more akin to a bystander who sees someone familiar 鈥� let鈥檚 call him 鈥楻obert Bork鈥� 鈥� leaving the video store and runs up and says to the clerk, 鈥楾hat was Robert Bork. What did he just rent?鈥� Although the video store may not have previously known the customer鈥檚 identity, it likely would violate the (federal law) if it gave rental information in response to the bystander鈥檚 question.鈥�
The filed last December in U.S. District Court, alleges that Lee鈥檚 news-media websites offer users the option of subscribing to newsletters or to newspapers that provide consumers with access to articles and video content in exchange for their personal information, including names and mailing addresses.
The lawsuit claims Lee doesn鈥檛 inform subscribers their personal identifying information is captured by various tracking methods embedded in the Lee websites, which allegedly is then transferred to the social-media company Facebook.
The plaintiffs allege violations of the Video Privacy Protection Act in 1988, which prohibits video providers from sharing, without consumers鈥� consent, any personally identifiable information that is tied to a customer鈥檚 viewing of pre-recorded audio-video material.
According to the plaintiffs, Facebook provides tools for web developers to monitor user interactions on their websites, and those interactions can then be shared with Facebook. Anyone with a developer鈥檚 console tool, which is built directly into commonly available internet browsers, can then monitor the transmission of data between Facebook and companies like Lee, the lawsuit claims.
Although the person monitoring the exchange of information wouldn鈥檛 see the name of the Lee customer, they would see that customer鈥檚 Facebook ID number 鈥� which, the lawsuit claims, can easily be used to identify the Facebook user. The plaintiffs say that one can simply append an unidentified individual鈥檚 Facebook ID number to the end of the URL in any internet browser, and that will open up the Facebook user鈥檚 public profile page, revealing whatever personal information they choose to have featured there.
In addition, individuals can allegedly use fairly basic web-browsing tools to see the titles of whatever video content triggered the initial exchange of information between Lee and Facebook, providing an indirect link between named Facebook users and the specific videos they have watched on Lee websites.
In seeking class-action status for the case, the plaintiffs are alleging there are more than 100 potential class members and that the aggregate amount of money in controversy exceeds $5 million. The lawsuit seeks a temporary injunction requiring Lee to immediately remove tracking tools from the company鈥檚 websites and to obtain the appropriate consent from subscribers for any information sharing that may take place.
The plaintiffs are represented by J. Barton Goplerud and Brian O. Marty of the West Des Moines law firm Shindler, Anderson, Goplerud & Weese.
Lee publishes newspapers and other media content in 77 markets across 26 states. The company鈥檚 10 Iowa papers include the Quad-City Times in Davenport, the Sioux City Journal, the Mason City Globe-Gazette, the Waterloo-Cedar Falls Courier and the Muscatine Journal.
Editor鈥檚 note: News stories from the Iowa Capital Dispatch are sometimes republished in Lee Enterprises鈥� Iowa newspapers.
This article was initially published by the , a part of States Newsroom.
