Client Alerts & Insights
Beware of the Spy Pixel: Arizona Faces New Class Action Trend Under Privacy Law
May 28, 2024
Authored By:
A new genre of class action privacy litigation has landed in Arizona. Several class action lawsuits were recently filed alleging email tracking using “spy pixel” trackers, allegedly in violation of the Arizona Telephone Privacy Protection Act, A.R.S. § 44-1376 et seq. (“ATPPA”). “Spy pixel” is a term used to describe trackers that can be embedded in an email to collect information about the email transfer, such as when the recipient opens the email, the recipient’s location, how long the recipient views the email, and whether the email is forwarded or printed, among other information.
The ATPPA forbids procuring any “communication service record” without authorization of the customer to whom the record pertains, or by fraudulent, deceptive, or false means. So far, these lawsuits follow a similar framework. The plaintiff alleges the company used “spy pixels” in marketing emails to collect sensitive information from the email recipient without plaintiff’s knowledge or consent, and that each email containing a “spy pixel” constitutes a separate violation of the ATPPA. Among other potential remedies, a plaintiff may recover economic damages of at least $1,000. A.R.S. § 44-1376.04(A)(2). Thus, “spy pixel” class actions have the potential to be high exposure cases.
As the number of new “spy pixel” suits increase, it is important that companies ensure they are protected. Benesch continues to monitor these and other trends in the privacy space so our clients can be aware of risks.
For more information, contact a member of Benesch’s Litigation Practice Group.
Mark S. Eisen at meisen@beneschlaw.com or 312.212.4956.
Laura E. Kogan at lkogan@beneschlaw.com or 216.363.4518.
Caroline Hamilton at chamilton@beneschlaw.com or 216.363.6114.
Latest News
Judicial Green Light: Court Upholds NLRB’s Cemex Decision
On April 21st, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the National Labor Relations Board’s (“NLRB”) decision in Cemex Construction Materials Pacific, LLC., reinforcing a significant shift in federal labor law governing union recognition and employer conduct during organizing campaigns.
The LEAD Model—Kidney Care’s Value-Based Care Journey LEADs Here
The new LEAD Model, launching in 2027, is CMS’s next-generation value-based care framework for kidney care, integrating CKD and ESRD patients into standard ACOs with a 10-year benchmark period, new payment options and greater flexibility for nephrology-led organizations.
DOL Proposes Universal Guidance Meant to Simplify Joint Employer Analysis
On April 22, 2026, the Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division proposed a new rule to clarify joint employer status and the related analysis under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), Family Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”), and the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Protection Act (“MSAPA”).
Only the Strong Survive: Easy Pitfalls to Avoid as a Defamation Plaintiff
Filing a defamation lawsuit is one thing. Surviving the inevitable motion to dismiss is another. A recent case out of the Eastern District of North Carolina, McKnight v. FOXY/WFXC/K 107.1/104.3 Radio Station, et al., Civil Action No. 5:26-cv-102, provides a useful case study in the kinds of missteps that can doom a defamation complaint before it ever reaches discovery.