Hacker News Reader

Comment by duxup | Hacker News Reader

Provided it is limited to that site. I'm not sure I have a problem with this kind of situation. If they want to track clicks, data entered, movement on their site... I'm ok with that.

If it is confined to that site and declared illegal, I gotta wonder where the line is drawn exactly...

View on HN

Should they be allowed to record your mouse movements while on their site and sell information about how steady or shaky your hands appear to be to health insurance or car insurance companies?

I don’t think that would involve the wiretapping lawsuit.

It's mentioned in the lawsuit

You can mention it in a lawsuit, doesn’t mean it is a violation of the law.

Cool. It involves the wiretapping lawsuit.

These smash-and-grab lawyers always way, way, way overstate things in the initial complaint. It's par for the course.

I wouldn't be surprised if Papa John's wasn't even doing any of the alleged things (I have not personally verified)... because it doesn't matter for these types of suits. The plaintiff's lawyers will conveniently ask for a settlement payout less than the estimated cost of litigation, and Papa John's will write a check to make it go away. It's how these things work.

It isn't limited to that site, quote from the "CEO of a major 'session replay' spyware company" in the filing:

> “this unique data can be used to activate custom digital experiences in the moment via an ecosystem of over 50 martech partners. With a global community of customer and partners, we are accelerating the interpretation of human behavior online and shaping a future of addictive customer experience"

> I gotta wonder where the line is drawn exactly

Violating the Federal Wiretap Act and CIPA

I’m not sure “can be” is a violation of wiretapping law is it?

That is a quote about how the information could and likely is shared; not "limited." The actual claims are in the lawsuit.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com