A major retailer is facing a class action lawsuit for allegedly violating privacy laws by embedding hidden spy pixels in marketing emails. The complaint, filed by Heather Knight in the Ventura Superior Court on September 18, 2024, accuses Patagonia, Inc. of unlawfully tracking the reading habits of email recipients without their consent.
According to the court filing, Knight claims that Patagonia embedded spy pixels within its marketing emails to track sensitive information such as the time and place subscribers opened and read their messages, their location, email client type, IP address, device information, and whether the email was forwarded. This clandestine collection of data was done without obtaining consent from the recipients, which Knight argues is a violation of Arizona’s Telephone, Utility and Communication Service Records Act (A.R.S. § 44-1376 et seq.).
Knight's lawsuit details how Patagonia used these spy pixels to build customer profiles for targeted marketing efforts. "Defendant exploits this data to build customer profiles so it can sell and market more products to them," the complaint states. The plaintiff alleges that this practice invaded her privacy and intruded upon her seclusion. Knight claims she frequently opened promotional emails from Patagonia since 2014 and most recently in March 2024.
The legal document emphasizes that Patagonia never received explicit consent from its email subscribers to collect such private information. By failing to obtain authorization, Patagonia is accused of breaching Arizona’s specific statutes designed to protect consumer communication records from unauthorized procurement.
Knight seeks various forms of relief from the court including actual damages or statutory damages of $1,000 for each violation—whichever is greater—along with profits made by Patagonia as a result of these violations. Additionally, she requests injunctive relief to prevent further unlawful conduct by Patagonia and demands that they comply with A.R.S. § 44-1376 et seq., along with reasonable attorneys' fees and litigation costs.
The case underscores broader concerns about digital privacy and corporate surveillance practices. It highlights how companies use sophisticated tracking technologies like spy pixels to gather detailed consumer data without transparency or consent.
Representing Knight in this case is L. Timothy Fisher from Bursor & Fisher P.A., while the presiding judge over this matter has yet to be named officially in public records under Case ID: 2024CUBT030800.