A proposed class action accusing Kenneth Cole Productions, Inc., of unlawfully sharing website visitor data with Meta, Google, and other third parties was voluntarily dismissed in the Northern District of California. The plaintiffs alleged that Kenneth Cole used third-party tracking tools on its website that allowed those companies to collect data about consumers’ interactions with the site, including after users had opted out through the site’s cookie-consent banner. The complaint asserted invasion of privacy, intrusion upon seclusion, unjust enrichment, and common-law fraud claims, and alleged violations of the wiretapping and pen-register provisions of the California Invasion of Privacy Act.
Last week, the named plaintiffs filed a notice voluntarily dismissing all of their claims with prejudice, while preserving the ability of putative class members to bring their own claims. The court acknowledged the dismissal the same day, ordered that each side bear their own attorneys’ fees and costs, and directed the clerk to terminate the case. The reason for the dismissal, or whether the parties reached any settlement, is unknown.
For companies, the takeaway is not that website tracking litigation risk has faded. It is that cookie banners, consent tools, pixels, tags, session replay, analytics tools, and advertising integrations need to work exactly as represented to users. Companies should regularly test whether opt-out signals actually stop the data flows they are supposed to stop, map which thirdparties receive website event data, review vendor configurations, and align privacy disclosures with the site’s technical reality. This is especially important where plaintiffs continue to plead website tracking claims under privacy, wiretapping, pen-register, fraud, and unjust enrichment theories.