ARTICLE
19 October 2026

California Limits Private Lawsuits Over Certain Online Tracking Claims

JL
Jackson Lewis P.C.

Contributor

Focused on employment and labor law since 1958, Jackson Lewis P.C.’s 1,100+ attorneys located in major cities nationwide consistently identify and respond to new ways workplace law intersects business. We help employers develop proactive strategies, strong policies and business-oriented solutions to cultivate high-functioning workforces that are engaged, stable and diverse, and share our clients’ goals to emphasize inclusivity and respect for the contribution of every employee.
California's Senate Bill 690 fundamentally reshapes the enforcement landscape of the California Invasion of Privacy Act by eliminating private lawsuits targeting website tracking technologies under the law's pen register provisions. The legislation, effective January 2027 with a two-year retroactive application, transfers enforcement authority exclusively to the California Attorney General for digital property violations while maintaining private rights of action for other CIPA provisions.
United States California Privacy

California has enacted Senate Bill (SB) 690, which narrows the circumstances under which private parties may bring lawsuits under the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA), Cal. Penal Code Section 638.51.

The new law takes effect January 1, 2027, and notably includes a two-year look-back period for pending lawsuits commenced before the law was enacted.

Brief History

CIPA, enacted in 1967, includes civil and criminal provisions and, importantly, allows private parties to enforce the law. The law also allows those private parties to recover at least $5,000 per violation. CIPA generally prohibits the interception and use of the contents of a communication without the consent of all parties to the communication. Subject to narrow exceptions, the law also prohibits the installation or use of a “pen register” or “trap and trace device” without a court order or consent of all parties whose communication might be captured by those devices.

1856552a.jpg

Pen register. Manufactured by J. H. Bunnell & Co., Brooklyn, New York. Mid-20th century. Image licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license.

Plaintiffs Have Targeted Websites

Although terms in the law like “pen register” or “trap and trace device” referred to physical devices used to collect telephone dialing and routing information on a landline telephone network, plaintiffs have increasingly alleged that this provision should apply to common website technologies, such as cookies, pixels, and tags, under the theory that those technologies capture information about the website visitor and their activity similar to a pen register and trap and trace device.

CIPA allows an injured person to recover statutory damages of $5,000 per violation or three times the amount of actual damages, whichever is greater. A plaintiff generally does not need to prove actual damages. As a result, businesses of various sizes have faced lawsuits, arbitration demands, and prelitigation notices alleging that their websites and the technologies deployed on their websites violated CIPA by collecting visitors’ digital routing, addressing, or signaling information.

Relief for Businesses

SB 690 eliminates the private right of action under the “pen register” or “trap and trace device” provisions of the law against digital properties. Under the amendment, only the California Attorney General may bring an action under CIPA’s civil-remedies provision against a private actor for an alleged violation arising from conduct occurring on an internet website, online application, or mobile application. The limitation also applies retroactively to pending claims in actions commenced during the two years preceding the law’s operative date.

SB 690 did not repeal CIPA’s restrictions on pen registers and trap and trace devices. Instead, it changes who may pursue civil remedies for this defined category of online conduct.

SB 690 also does not eliminate private lawsuits involving other provisions of CIPA, including certain claims alleging unauthorized wiretapping or the recording or use of confidential communications.

Businesses should therefore avoid treating SB 690 as a general exemption for website tracking technologies. Companies should continue reviewing the cookies, pixels, analytics tools, chat functions, session-replay software, and other third-party technologies deployed on their websites and applications.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

[View Source]
See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More