DataBreaches.Net

Menu
  • About
  • Breach Notification Laws
  • Privacy Policy
  • Transparency Report
Menu

Federal court denies Wyndham Hotels & Resorts’ motion to dismiss FTC’s complaint

Posted on April 7, 2014 by Dissent

Ashkan Soltani has uploaded an important ruling in FTC v. Wyndham, a case discussed many times on this blog.

The short version of the ruling is that Wyndham went 0 for 3 on its challenges to the FTC’s authority to enforce data security under the FTC Act, to enforce data security in the absence of regulations that would provide fair notice, and the FTC’s pleading of the significant consumer injury or risk of concrete harm.

If you’re a fan of the FTC and want to see more enforcement for data security, today was a great day.

That said, Judge Esther Salas cautions:

To be sure, the Court does not render a decision on liability today. Instead, it resolves a motion to dismiss a complaint. A liability determination is for another day. And this decision does not give the FTC a blank check to sustain a lawsuit against every business that has been hacked. Instead, the Court denies a motion to dismiss given the allegations in this complaint— which must be taken as true at this stage—in view of binding and persuasive precedent.

 Caption corrected.

 

No related posts.

Category: Business SectorCommentaries and AnalysesHackOf NoteU.S.

Post navigation

← Neiman Marcus Data Breach Said Work of Russians Who Eluded U.S.
Wyndham's motion to dismiss FTC data security complaint denied →

Now more than ever

"Stand with Ukraine:" above raised hands. The illustration is in blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine's flag.

Search

Browse by Categories

Recent Posts

  • India’s Max Financial says hacker accessed customer data from its insurance unit
  • Brazil’s central bank service provider hacked, $140M stolen
  • Iranian and Pro-Regime Cyberattacks Against Americans (2011-Present)
  • Nigerian National Pleads Guilty to International Fraud Scheme that Defrauded Elderly U.S. Victims
  • Nova Scotia Power Data Breach Exposed Information of 280,000 Customers
  • No need to hack when it’s leaking: Brandt Kettwick Defense edition
  • SK Telecom to be fined for late data breach report, ordered to waive cancellation fees, criminal investigation into them launched
  • Louis Vuitton Korea suffers cyberattack as customer data leaked
  • Hunters International to provide free decryptors for all victims as they shut down (2)
  • SEC and SolarWinds Seek Settlement in Securities Fraud Case

No, You Can’t Buy a Post or an Interview

This site does not accept sponsored posts or link-back arrangements. Inquiries about either are ignored.

And despite what some trolls may try to claim: DataBreaches has never accepted even one dime to interview or report on anyone. Nor will DataBreaches ever pay anyone for data or to interview them.

Want to Get Our RSS Feed?

Grab it here:

https://databreaches.net/feed/

RSS Recent Posts on PogoWasRight.org

  • German court awards Facebook user €5,000 for data protection violations
  • Record-Breaking $1.55M CCPA Settlement Against Health Information Website Publisher
  • Ninth Circuit Reviews Website Tracking Class Actions and the Reach of California’s Privacy Law
  • US healthcare offshoring: Navigating patient data privacy laws and regulations
  • Data breach reveals Catwatchful ‘stalkerware’ is spying on thousands of phones
  • Google Trackers: What You Can Actually Escape And What You Can’t
  • Oregon Amends Its Comprehensive Privacy Statute

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

DMCA Concern: dmca[at]databreaches.net
© 2009 – 2025 DataBreaches.net and DataBreaches LLC. All rights reserved.