AI notetakers illustrate how artificial intelligence is fundamentally changing how people work. For example, there are now “AI Assistants” that snap onto the back of cell phones like a wireless battery pack. Instead of taking detailed notes during a meeting, preparing a summary, and identifying follow-up items, employees can use an AI notetaker to complete
A recent federal court decision offers important lessons for businesses that use cookies, pixels, and other tracking technologies on consumer-facing websites. Although the court dismissed one federal wiretap claim with leave to amend, it allowed other privacy claims to proceed, including claims under California’s pen register statute and common law intrusion upon seclusion.
The case
If 2025 was the year website-tracking claims became impossible to ignore, 2026 is the year those cases began to mature. Courts are looking beyond whether a pixel, cookie, chat tool, or session-replay script was present on a site. Instead, they are focusing more closely on what data was collected, when it was collected, what disclosures
Smart glasses with AI capabilities have evolved from futuristic concept to everyday reality. The market exploded in 2024, with global smart glasses shipments surging 210% year-over-year, driven primarily by Meta’s Ray-Ban smart glasses. From the consumer-focused Meta Ray-Ban Display (featuring a built-in heads-up display announced in September 2025) to Meta’s partnership with Oakley for
The rapid adoption of AI notetaking and transcription tools has transformed how organizations (and individuals) capture, analyze, and share meeting and other content. But as these technologies expand, so too do the legal and compliance risks. A recent putative class action lawsuit filed in federal court in California against Otter.ai, a leading provider of AI
Online retailer Harriet Carter Gifts recently obtained summary judgment from the district court in a class action under Pennsylvania wiretap law. At the heart of this case is the interpretation and application of the Pennsylvania Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act of 1978 (WESCA), a statute designed to regulate the interception of electronic communications. The
Massachusetts’ highest court recently issued an opinion that delves into the complex intersection of privacy law and modern technology. The case centers around whether the collection and transmission of users’ web browsing activities to third parties without their consent constitutes a violation of the Massachusetts Wiretap Act.
However, the claim is not unique to Massachusetts.
When Colorado enacted the Colorado Privacy Act (CPA), it included “biometric data that may be processed for the purpose of uniquely identifying an individual.” However, the CPA as originally drafted did not cover the personal data of individuals acting in a commercial or employment context. Last week, Colorado amended the CPA to broaden the protections
California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA) has become a focal point in recent legal battles, particularly within the retail industry. As retailers increasingly adopt technologies like session replay and chatbots to enhance customer experiences, they inadvertently tread into murky legal waters. These technologies, while valuable for optimizing websites and addressing customer inquiries, have faced a barrage of lawsuits and threats.