Penkava v. Yahoo: dismissed

Carson Penkava, who was suing Yahoo! under California wiretapping laws, filed for dismissal with prejudice at the end of November. No reasons were given.

Plaintiff hereby voluntarily dismisses the litigation with prejudice as to his individual claims and without prejudice as to the potential claims of any absent putative class members. The rights of absent putative class members will not be prejudiced by the dismissal of the Plaintiff’s claim because no class has been certified in this litigation.

I talked about this case previously (here, here, and here) and I don’t have much more to say now. I thought it was pretty unlikely that there was an actual violation going on here. Now I guess we have to wait for another case to see if this is true.

Related Posts

Wiretapping and email

An Alabama resident is suing Yahoo for violating the California wiretapping law. Specifically he’s suing under CA Penal Code section 631. The thing is, this section of the law deals with wiretapping over “telephone or telegraph” wires. That doesn’t seem to apply in this case as Yahoo isn’t using either telephone or telegraph wires to transmit their packets.
Holomaxx tried the wiretapping argument when they sued Yahoo and Hotmail. That case cited a cause of action under both federal law and California law. The wiretapping claim was addressed specifically by the lawyers for the defendants.

Read More

More on Yahoo and Engagement

A friend of the blog contacted me earlier today and pointed out that the news that Dan posted about Yahoo and engagement that I blogged about last week was actually reported by George Bilbrey in a Mediapost article on August 1.

Read More

Penkava v. Yahoo: wiretapping

According to stipulations filed yesterday Penkava and Yahoo! have agreed to go to private arbitration. This will happen before September 1, 2013. Also filed yesterday was an agreement that Yahoo! has until September 7, 2012 to respond to the complaint.

Read More