A class action lawsuit alleges that online crypto currency platform CoinZoom violated Illinois' stringent biometrics privacy law by requiring users to submit to a facial geometry scan to verify their identity during the signup process.
Plaintiff Michael Massel filed a class action lawsuit in Cook County Circuit Court against CoinZoom, citing negligence and carelessness in violation of the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA).
CoinZoom is an online cryptocurrency trading platform that lets users trade, purchase, or transfer cryptocurrency. The lawsuit claims that as part of the signup process, CoinZoom requires users to submit to a facial geometry scan in their mobile app to verify their identity. Massel claims that he signed up for the CoinZoom platform in 2018 and was required to submit his facial geometry during the signup process.
The lawsuit states that BIPA requires that prior to collecting biometric data, which includes facial geometry scans, companies must inform employees in writing that their biometric data will be collected and stored. It also states that employees must be informed in writing of the specific purpose for which the biometric data is being collected and for how long it will be stored. Additionally, BIPA requires that companies must receive a written release from the employee for the collection of their biometric data.
Massel alleges that CoinZoom invades the privacy of its users by collecting and storing their biometric data without informed consent. He further claims that the company never received a release from him allowing them to collect his biometric data, and he never authorized the company to collect his biometric data for this use.
Companies operating such online apps have become a growing target of class action lawsuits under the BIPA law in recent months. The law has already spawned thousands of class action lawsuits against companies across the country that may do business in Illinois. The law has primarily been used to target employers, seeking relatively easy settlements worth millions in many cases, as the courts have interpreted the law to allow plaintiffs to bring potentially big money claims even if they were never actually harmed by the biometric scans in any way.
Under the law, plaintiffs can demand damages of $1,000-$5,000 per violation. The Illinois Supreme Court has ruled the law should be interpreted to define "individual violations" as each time a company scans someone's biometric identifying characteristic over the preceding five years, no matter how many times the scan may have taken place previously. When multiplied across hundreds, thousands or even millions of customers, users or employees, the potential payouts can quickly climb into the millions or even billions of dollars should such a lawsuit proceed to trial, prompting nearly all companies to opt to settle rather than face a potential financial catastrophe at trial.
Massel is seeking money damages for himself and everyone in his class action lawsuit, plus court costs, attorney fees, and any other relief the court deems proper. He is represented in this case by attorneys Michael L. Fradin and James L. Simon, both of Ohio.