Judge rules for Golden State Warriors, dismisses eavesdropping app lawsuit
Read about the latest sports tech news, innovations, ideas and products that impact players, fans and the sports industry at SportTechie.com.
A federal judge sided with the Golden State Warriors last month, dismissing a lawsuit that claimed the basketball team’s official mobile application was unlawfully eavesdropping on fans.
Subscribe to the
SportTechie Newsletter
- NBA VP Discusses Expanding Virtual Reality Internationally
- Why MLS Commissioner Don Garber Collaborated With Facebook To Stream Live Matches
- TNO Launches New Automated In-Game System For Basketball Broadcasts, Stats
In August, New York resident LaTisha Satchell alleged that Beacon technology utilized within Golden State’s mobile application accessed fan’s smartphones and recorded their conversations without consent. The application’s developer, YinzCam, and mobile technology company Signal360 were also named in the suit.
Federal Judge Jeffrey White dismissed all charges against the defendants, citing insufficient evidence that Satchell’s conversations were in fact intercepted or used by Golden State or the app’s developers, according to MediaPost.
“There are no allegations that plaintiff was speaking to someone, privately, about a particular topic while the app was running and she suddenly received an advertisement about that topic,” White wrote in his official ruling.
Golden State designed its mobile application to utilize Beacon technology to provide its fans location based promotions and advertising while inside Oracle Arena. Upon initial reports of the lawsuit in August, Signal360 Chief Operating Officer Lauren Cooley gave comment to the San Jose Mercury News.
“We have been made aware of the suit and it appears there is a misunderstanding about how our technology works,” Cooley wrote. “Our technology does not intercept, store, transmit, or otherwise use any oral content for marketing purposes or for any other purpose.”
White’s ruling was such that Satchell could revise her complaint to include the specifics of her conversations that were intercepted and have her case reheard, but the original suit’s class action status makes that action unlikely.
