FB pixel

AGs from 22 states and DC oppose Clearview’s biometric data privacy settlement

AGs from 22 states and DC oppose Clearview’s biometric data privacy settlement
 

A novel settlement of a class action biometric data privacy lawsuit by Clearview AI that would give a stake in the company to claimants is being challenged on its way to the finish line by nearly half of the states in the U.S.

The Attorneys General of 22 states and the District of Columbia have filed a motion for leave to file an Amici Curiae brief to explain their opposition to the settlement to U.S. District Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman.

Vermont, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Tennessee and Washington.

The settlement was agreed to in June, and would give the class a 23 percent share in the company, which could be worth nearly $52 million in the case of a sale at a $225 million valuation reported at the time. It also includes an opportunity to claim a 17 percent share of Clearview’s revenue over the next two years.

Coleman gave the agreement preliminary approval on June 21, and plans to hold a hearing on Monday, December 16 to consider the Amici Curiae request.

The state AGs argue that the settlement does not provide injunctive relief – in other words, a mechanism to prevent the continuation of the harm cited — and therefore “is not fair, reasonable, and adequate.”  The plaintiffs also “failed to make a sufficient showing for why the highly unusual and speculative monetary recovery is adequate here.”

The filing also criticizes the 39 percent cut that goes to plaintiff’s attorneys under the agreement.

“The information and perspective that Amici States offer is critical to understanding the continued risk the proposed settlement poses to consumers,” the AGs argue.

Clearview has filed a motion to have the Amici Curiae briefs barred, on grounds that it is not timely, as the deadline for objections has passed. The states say the deadline does not apply to them, as they are not class members.

Related Posts

Article Topics

 |   |   |   |   | 

Latest Biometrics News

 

Leidos, Idemia PS advance checkpoint modernization with biometrics, CAT-2 systems

Leidos and Idemia Public Security have formed a strategic partnership to deploy biometric‑enabled eGates and integrated Credential Authentication Technology (CAT-2)…

 

Google Wallet supports Aadhaar verifiable credentials in India

Google has added support for Aadhaar Verifiable Credentials in India, allowing users to store and present their digital Aadhaar ID…

 

India scales farmer ID system for payments with KPMG support

The India office of influential accounting firm KPMG has explained how it supported the advancement of the country’s Digital Agriculture…

 

Digital ID systems fail migrants due to policy gaps, Caribou finds

A new report by research organization Caribou has warned that digital ID systems around the world have continued to deepen…

 

Hopae launches eIDAS 2.0, AMLR onboarding readiness tool

Hopae has launched a free self-assessment tool to help financial institutions offering customer onboarding and identity verification to evaluate their…

 

Certainty vs flexibility – does the UK need a Biometric Surveillance Act?

By Professor Fraser Sampson, former UK Biometrics & Surveillance Camera Commissioner Last week London became a city of two tales. Two…

Comments

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Biometric Market Analysis and Buyer's Guides

Most Viewed This Week

Featured Company

Biometrics Insight, Opinion

Digital ID In-Depth

Biometrics White Papers

Biometrics Events