A Consumer Protection and Employment Law Firm Serving California, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Illinois.

Consumers in California: What Are Your Privacy Rights?

Table Of Contents
Summarize with
ChatGPT Claude Gemini Perplexity Grok

Privacy is an important value for people throughout our country. Californians are particularly adamant in holding up privacy as an important right, even voting in 1972 to include the right to privacy as an inalienable right.

However, the right to privacy – including the right to have control over who receives one’s personal information – becomes a much more complicated issue in the internet age. With Facebook, Google and other internet sites obtaining more and more of our personal information, what are our rights as consumers and how do we enforce them?

Californias New Privacy Laws

Earlier this year, California passed a new law to protect the rights of consumers throughout the state. According to the New York Times:

“The new law grants consumers the right to know what information companies are collecting about them, why they are collecting that data and with whom they are sharing it. It gives consumers the right to tell companies to delete their information as well as to not sell or share their data.”

In addition, the new law protects consumers from negative backlash for exercising these rights, guaranteeing consumers the same quality of service.

What This Means For You

Although it is very encouraging news that the California legislature is working to protect the rights of its consumers, questions remain. How will these new laws be enforced? What is the small print that can allow the major companies and social media networks to avoid accountability?

The most important thing you can do is to be careful about sharing your information. Further, if you have had your information used against your wishes or have had your privacy rights violated in any way, this is your chance to fight back. Talk with an experienced lawyer and fight for the compensation you deserve.

Quick Navigation

Free Consultation

Undisclosed
Settlement

TCPA class action against the Los Angeles Times. Final approval granted 2014.

More Details
$750,000
Settlement

Common fund class-wide TCPA settlement against home healthcare provider. Final approval granted.

More Details
$27.6M
Settlement

TCPA class action certified on behalf of approximately 2,000,000 class members under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3). Subsequently settled on a Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) basis. Final approval granted.

More Details
$5.2M
Settlement

/

Unruh Act class action on behalf of approximately 240,000 consumers challenging Tinder’s age-based differential pricing for its subscription service. Final approval granted; subsequently went up on appeal.

More Details
$390,000
Settlement

TCPA class action alleging HD Supply sent unauthorized marketing text messages to consumers’ mobile phones without consent between October 21, 2011 and July 26, 2017. Presided over by Judge Fernando M. Olguin. Case terminated January 29, 2018.

More Details
$1,500,000
Settlement

/

TCPA class action against a Kansas-based payday lender alleged to have contacted consumers via prerecorded calls on their cell phones to collect alleged debts without consent. California federal judge granted final approval.

More Details
$6,500,000
Settlement

/

Cal. Penal Code § 632.7 class action certified by contested motion under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) on behalf of over 40,000 class members whose calls were recorded without their knowledge or consent. Final approval granted.

More Details
$13,000,000
Settlement

/

$13 Million Class action alleging HSBC recorded consumer telephone calls without knowledge or consent in violation of California’s Privacy Statute (Penal Code § 632.7). California Federal Judge granted final approval.

More Details
$34,000,000
Settlement

/

One of the largest TCPA class action settlements in U.S. history at time of approval. Alleged Chase used an automatic telephone dialing system to contact consumers on their cell phones without prior express consent from July 2008 through December 2013. Settlement class included over 32 million members. Final approval granted March 2016.

More Details
$150,000,000
Settlement

/

Class action on behalf of over 100,000 owners of GM vehicles equipped with allegedly defective LG-manufactured batteries posing fire and safety risks. Litigation commenced December 2020. U.S. District Judge Terrence G. Berg indicated preliminary approval of the $150 million settlement.

More Details
$100,000,000
Settlement

/ /

Landmark gig-economy class action. DoorDash drivers in California and Massachusetts alleged they were wrongly classified as independent contractors rather than employees. Firm served as class counsel. Final approval granted January 13, 2022 — the largest gig-economy worker class settlement in U.S. history at the time.

More Details

Office Locations

Copyright 2025 Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C. All Rights Reserved.