Plaintiffs in a privacy rights lawsuit against behavioral targeting technology provider NebuAd Inc. and six Internet service providers who shared their users' data with NebuAd have told the trial court they will press on even in the wake of the court's ruling that none of the ISP defendants are subject to suit in California. The court's Oct. 6 ruling left California-based NebuAd as the only defendant in the case, a complication because NebuAd liquidated its assets and went out of business in May 2009.
According to the court's opinion allowing NebuAd's current counsel to withdraw, also issued on Oct. 6, the plaintiffs believe that "NebuAd is not really going anywhere," and that NebuAd "is simply restarting with a new name," based out of the United Kingdom.
NebuAd's attorneys say they are owed $500,000 in legal fees by NebuAd and its insurers. The court permitted the attorneys to withdraw, but declined their additional request to stay the proceedings against NebuAd until new counsel could be retained.
The plaintiffs are alleging violations of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, the California Computer Crime Law, the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and the California Invasion of Privacy Act.
The ISPs who were dismissed from the case are Bresnan Communications, CenturyTel Communications Inc., Embarq Inc., Knology Inc., WideOpen West Finance LLC, and Cable One. None of the ISPs is based in California. The trial court ruled that the ISPs' dealings with NebuAd was not a sufficient and constitutionally reasonable basis for a California court to assert jurisdiction over them.
The case is Valentine v. NebuAd Inc., No. 08-5113 (N.D. Cal.).
Comments