`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
`EASTERN DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`ANTHONY HALL,
`on behalf of himself and all others
`similarly situated,
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`vs.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CLEARVIEW AI, INC., and.
`CDW GOVERNMENT LLC;
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`
`
`Case No. 20-cv-00846
`
`
`
`Jury Demanded
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`Plaintiff Anthony Hall, on behalf of himself and a putative class (“Plaintiff” or “Hall”),
`
`brings this Class Action Complaint against Defendants Clearview AI, Inc (“Clearview”); CDW
`
`Government, LLC (“CDW”) and alleges the following:
`
`Introduction
`
`1.
`
`A New York Times article published on January 18, 2020 introduced Americans to the
`
`then relatively unknown company Clearview AI, Inc. The article described a dystopian
`
`surveillance database, owned and operated by a private company and leased to the highest
`
`bidder.
`
`2.
`
`Clearview AI’s database includes the photographs, and personal and private data,
`
`including names, home addresses, and work addresses, of millions of Americans. Clearview
`
`acquired the billions of data points by “scraping” or harvesting the data from publicly available
`
`internet-based platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter.
`
`
`
`Case: 1:20-cv-00846 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/05/20 Page 2 of 15 PageID #:1
`
`3.
`
`But Clearview’s database is unique – it has run every one of the 3 billion photographs it
`
`has acquired through facial recognition software to extract and index the unique biometric data
`
`from each face. The database thus also contains the biometric identifiers and information of
`
`millions of Americans. Any private citizen can be identified by uploading a photo to the
`
`database. Once identified, the end-user then has access to all of the individual’s personal details
`
`that Clearview has also obtained.
`
`4.
`
`A second article published in the Chicago Sun-Times on January 29, 2020 revealed that
`
`the Chicago Police Department was using Clearview’s surveillance database to aid in law
`
`enforcement operations.
`
`Jurisdiction
`
`5.
`
`This Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d)(2), the Class Action Fairness Act
`
`(“CAFA”) because there are 100 or more members of the class, the parties and putative class
`
`members are minimally diverse and the aggregate amount in controversy is greater than
`
`$5,000,000.
`
`6.
`
`This Court has personal jurisdiction over Clearview because they conduct a substantial
`
`amount of business here which forms the basis of Plaintiffs’ claims. Clearview has made their
`
`surveillance database, which contains the private and personal data and biometric information of
`
`thousands of Illinois residents, available to Chicago Police department. All defendants’
`
`violations of Illinois law are based on and arise from their contacts with the state and its
`
`residents. The court has personal jurisdiction over CDW because they are an Illinois company
`
`headquartered in Illinois.
`
`7.
`
`Venue is proper here under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2) because a substantial amount of the
`
`acts and omissions giving rise to the claims occurred in Illinois.
`
`
`
`Case: 1:20-cv-00846 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/05/20 Page 3 of 15 PageID #:1
`
`
`
`Parties
`
`8.
`
`Anthony Hall is a natural person and resident of this district. He maintains an active
`
`presence on social media, including Facebook and Instagram. He also uses Venmo to make and
`
`accept payments to other individuals.
`
`9.
`
`Clearview AI, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its headquarters in New York City,
`
`New York. It owns and operates the surveillance database and markets its products to Illinois-
`
`based companies and agencies, including the Chicago Police Department.
`
`10.
`
`CDW Government LLC (“CDW”), is an Illinois company headquartered in Vernon Hills,
`
`Illinois. CDW provides equipment and services to local government agencies, including the
`
`Chicago Police Department.
`
`Clearview’s Surveillance Database
`
`11.
`
`Clearview ‘scrapes,’ ‘harvests,’ or otherwise obtains information and photos of millions
`
`of Americans from the internet, in particular social media platforms like Facebook and
`
`Instagram. That is, they use automated software or processes to obtain massive amounts of data
`
`without the consent or knowledge of the platform users.
`
`12.
`
`Clearview then runs the photos through facial recognition software which identifies the
`
`photos that contain faces.
`
`13.
`
`The faces are then processed by Clearview’s software, and their biometric data is
`
`extracted. The biometric data is a collection of vectors and/or other data points that allows faces
`
`to be classified, searched and indexed.
`
`
`
`Case: 1:20-cv-00846 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/05/20 Page 4 of 15 PageID #:1
`
`14.
`
`Clearview’s database links the biometric data to the other data Clearview has scraped so
`
`an end-user can find out where the photos came from along with a significant amount of personal
`
`and private details about a given individual.
`
`15.
`
`In short, anyone with access to the database, including any employee of Clearview, or
`
`reseller of the database, or end-user can upload a single photo and identify the person in real-
`
`time. A single picture on the internet means that any private citizen can immediately be
`
`identified and tracked.
`
`16.
`
`Clearview sells or leases access to the surveillance database to public and private entities
`
`for profit.
`
`17.
`
`Clearview also contracts with third parties, for example CDW, to sell or lease access to
`
`the surveillance database.
`
`18.
`
`Clearview offers 30-day free trials to individual law enforcement officers so that they
`
`will encourage their departments to subscribe to the database.
`
`19.
`
`Clearview also monitors the use of the database by the end-users – Clearview employees
`
`can see who law enforcement officers are searching for.
`
`The Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”)
`
`20. More than ten years ago, the Illinois Legislature recognized the promises and perils of
`
`biometric identification technology. It passed the Biometric Information Privacy Act, 740 ILCS
`
`§ 14/1 et seq., to establish and safeguard Illinois’ residents absolute right to control their
`
`biometric data.
`
`21.
`
`22.
`
`23.
`
`BIPA regulates both biometric identifiers and biometric information. See, id.
`
`Under the act, a “scan of…face geometry,” is a biometric identifier. Id. at § 14/10.
`
`Biometric information is any information derived from a biometric identifier. Id.
`
`
`
`Case: 1:20-cv-00846 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/05/20 Page 5 of 15 PageID #:1
`
`24.
`
`Under the act, a private entity like Clearview or CDW in possession of either biometric
`
`identifiers or information must develop a written policy, available to the public, establishing a
`
`retention schedule and guidelines for permanently destroying the information or identifiers. Id. §
`
`14/15(a).
`
`25.
`
`Clearview and CDW are in possession of biometric identifiers and information which is
`
`stored in the Clearview database.
`
`26.
`
`Neither Defendant has provided any policy whatsoever establishing either a retention
`
`schedule or guidelines for permanently destroying the biometric data.
`
`27.
`
`Under the act, a private entity like Clearview or CDW is prohibited from collecting,
`
`capturing, or otherwise obtaining a person’s biometric information or identifier unless it first: a)
`
`informs the subject in writing that the information or identifier is being collected or stored; b)
`
`informs the subject in writing of the specific purpose and length of term for which the
`
`information or identifier is being collected, stored, or used;, and, c) receives a written release
`
`from the subject of the information or identifier. Id. at § 14/15(b).
`
`28.
`
`Neither Clearview nor CDW at any relevant time had informed Plaintiff or any member
`
`of the Class (described below) any of the information required under § 14/15(b). Neither the
`
`Plaintiff nor members of the putative Class executed a written release to Clearview or CDW.
`
`29.
`
`Under the act, a private entity, like Clearview or CDW, in possession of a person’s
`
`biometric identifier or information may not sell, lease, trade, or otherwise, profit from a person’s
`
`information or identifier. Id. § 14/15(c).
`
`30.
`
`Clearview and CDW are actively selling and/or leasing and profiting off the Plaintiff’s
`
`and each member of the putative class’ information or identifier. They have multiple contracts
`
`across the country, including Illinois, to provide access to the surveillance database for money.
`
`
`
`Case: 1:20-cv-00846 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/05/20 Page 6 of 15 PageID #:1
`
`31.
`
`Under the act, a private entity, like Clearview or CDW, in possession of a person’s
`
`biometric identifier or information may not disclose or disseminate the information except in
`
`certain specific situations, such as to comply with a valid warrant or subpoena. Id. at § 14/15(d).
`
`32.
`
`Clearview and CDW routinely, as part of their database access leasing business, disclose,
`
`re-disclose, and disseminate Plaintiff and members of the putative Class’ biometric information
`
`and identifiers.
`
`33.
`
`Finally, under the act, a private entity, like Clearview or CDW, in possession of a
`
`person’s biometric identifier or information must store, transmit, and protect the information
`
`from disclosure using a reasonable standard of care for their industry and in a manner that is the
`
`same or more protective than the manner in which the private entity stores, transmits, and
`
`protects other confidential and sensitive information. Id. at § 14/15(e).
`
`34.
`
`Clearview and CDW’s employees have unrestricted access to the surveillance database.
`
`This is not a reasonable standard of care in industries that involve highly private databases of
`
`sensitive information.
`
`35.
`
`BIPA provides a private right of action for violations of the act. For each individual
`
`violation, a person may recover the greater of actual damages or $1,000 for each negligent
`
`violation or $5,000 for each intentional or reckless violation. Id. at § 14/20. The act also provides
`
`for reasonable attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses and any other relief the court deems
`
`appropriate, including injunctive relief. Id.
`
`36.
`
`Clearview knew that their scheme to covertly collect and sell personal and private data
`
`and biometric information would violate the privacy rights that BIPA was enacted to protect and
`
`that the violations would cause substantial harm to Illinois residents.
`
`
`
`
`
`Case: 1:20-cv-00846 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/05/20 Page 7 of 15 PageID #:1
`
`The Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act (“ICFA”)
`
`37.
`
`The ICFA proscribes any unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the course of trade or
`
`commerce. 815 ILCS § 505/2.
`
`38.
`
`The ICFA allows any consumer who suffers actual damages from a violation of the act to
`
`bring a private action to recover actual damages or any other relief the court deems proper,
`
`including punitive damages, as well as attorney’s fees and costs. Id. at §§ 505/10a(a); 505/10a(c).
`
`39.
`
`In determining whether a practice is unlawful under the act, “consideration shall be given
`
`to the interpretations of the Federal Trade Commission and the federal courts relating to Section
`
`5 (a) of the Federal Trade Commission Act [15 U.S.C. § 45]. Id. at § 505/2
`
`40.
`
`Clearview’s data harvesting, face recognition data extraction, and construction of a
`
`surveillance database it sells, leases, or lends to public and private organizations occurred in the
`
`course of commerce or trade.
`
`41.
`
`CDW’s contract with Clearview to lease database access to third-parties occurred in the
`
`course of commerce or trade.
`
`42.
`
`Clearview harvested the personal information and biometric data from millions of Illinois
`
`residents, including minors, without their consent, then compiled the information into a database,
`
`and sold, leased, or lent access to that database.
`
`43.
`
`Clearview’s secret harvesting of Illinois’ residents’ photographs, biometric data, for
`
`profit is an unfair business practice.
`
`44.
`
`Clearview intended for Illinois residents to be unaware of their covert data harvesting
`
`operation, knowing that if they were aware, they would take steps to protect their personal and
`
`private data.
`
`
`
`Case: 1:20-cv-00846 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/05/20 Page 8 of 15 PageID #:1
`
`45.
`
`CDW’s provision of Clearview’s surveillance database to third parties is an unfair
`
`business practice.
`
`46.
`
`Once Plaintiff became aware of Clearview’s database and the likelihood they were
`
`included in it, they were harmed by the invasion of their privacy, the anxiety and fear from being
`
`included in the surveillance database without their knowledge and consent, and by having to pay
`
`for an attorney to file and litigate this suit to have their data removed from the database.
`
`Common Law—Civil Conversion
`
`47.
`
`Plaintiff and putative Class members’ biometric identifiers and information, including but
`
`not limited to their facial geometries, are identifiable, personal property.
`
`48.
`
`This property is represented by and connected to the data contained in Clearview’s
`
`database and stored on its servers.
`
`49.
`
`Individuals have an absolute and exclusive right to control the use of their personal
`
`property.
`
`50.
`
`Clearview and CDW, without authorization, assumed control over the property by
`
`capturing, storing, and selling the Plaintiffs’ and Class members’ biometric identifiers and
`
`information.
`
`51.
`
`The value of such property lies, in part, in the exclusive right to possess and control it.
`
`More specifically, the right to exclusive control over its collection and dissemination. Without
`
`that core right, an individual’s interest in their personal biometric identifiers and information is
`
`worthless.
`
`52.
`
`Clearview and CDW profited off of their illegal acquisition and control of the biometric
`
`identifiers and information.
`
`
`
`
`
`Case: 1:20-cv-00846 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/05/20 Page 9 of 15 PageID #:1
`
`Plaintiff’s Allegations
`
`53.
`
`At all relevant times, Hall has resided in the Northern District of Illinois and his actions
`
`took place, almost exclusively, within this district.
`
`54.
`
`Hall regularly posts to social-media platforms, especially Facebook and Instagram. His
`
`posts include photos of himself, his face, and photos of the faces of his family and friends. His
`
`online accounts also contain personal information such as his location, the name of his business,
`
`and the identity of his wife and their young child.
`
`55. Many of these posts are public because he posts and comments on many different social,
`
`business, and political groups on platforms like Facebook.
`
`56.
`
`Additionally, there are many photos of Hall on other people’s social media platforms, and
`
`he is often ‘tagged’ in these photos with his name. These other social media accounts also
`
`contain information that could be used to further identify Hall’s personal information, such as his
`
`home address, his work schedule, places he frequents, and the identity of other friends and
`
`family members, including those who do not have a social media presence.
`
`57.
`
`In January 2020, Hall learned of the Clearview surveillance database through media
`
`reports and friends.
`
`58.
`
`Because Hall has such a widespread and active social media presence, on information and
`
`belief, Hall’s biometric information and identifiers and his personal and private information are
`
`contained in Clearview’s database.
`
`59.
`
`Hall was immediately concerned for his own privacy and safety and the privacy and
`
`safety of his friends and family.
`
`60.
`
`Hall has experienced anxiety, stress and other emotional distress based on his inclusion in
`
`the surveillance database and the unauthorized, for-profit acquisition and use of his biometric
`
`
`
`Case: 1:20-cv-00846 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/05/20 Page 10 of 15 PageID #:1
`
`information by Clearview and CDW and the negligence of the Platform Defendants in allowing
`
`Clearview to scrape their data.
`
`61.
`
`Hall has also suffered actual damages from the loss of control over his personal
`
`property—his biometric identifiers and information—as a result of the Defendants’ actions.
`
`62.
`
`Due to Defendants’ actions, Hall’s unique biometric information, which BIPA was
`
`designed to protect, has been compromised and sold for profit. It is unclear whether Hall will
`
`ever be able to regain control over his biometric information.
`
`63.
`
`Further, and as a result of all Defendants’ actions, Hall, and his family and friends, are at
`
`a greater risk of stalking, harassment, and identity theft.
`
`Class Allegations
`
`64.
`
`Anthony Hall brings this action on behalf of himself and under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23, on
`
`behalf of a class defined as:
`
`All persons who reside or resided in Illinois whose biometric identifier or information is
`or was contained in the Clearview database at any time.
`
`65.
`
`Plaintiff reserves the right to amend or modify the Class definition as necessary following
`
`discovery.
`
`66.
`
`On information and belief, the Class is so numerous that joinder is impracticable. While
`
`the exact number is unknown, Plaintiff believes, based on the 3 billion images contained in the
`
`database and the fact that CPD determined it was a useful resource that the Class contains over
`
`100 members.
`
`67.
`
`Common questions of law and fact exist and predominate over individual questions and
`
`include:
`
`a.
`
`Whether any of the members consented to their inclusion in the surveillance
`
`database;
`
`
`
`Case: 1:20-cv-00846 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/05/20 Page 11 of 15 PageID #:1
`
`b.
`
`Whether an individual’s unique biometric identifiers and information, such as
`
`facial geometry, is intangible personal property or whether they have property right in
`
`such identifiers and information;
`
`c.
`
`Did the Platform Defendants owe a duty to Class members and was that duty
`
`breached and did it result in harm to the class members;
`
`d.
`
`The extent of any damages incurred by Class members as a result of Defendants’
`
`actions.
`
`68.
`
`Plaintiff’s claims are also typical and co-extensive with the claims of the class because he
`
`and members of the Class have all suffered the same injuries as a result of identical conduct by
`
`the Defendants.
`
`69.
`
`Plaintiff will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the proposed Class and he has
`
`retained counsel with experience in consumer law, Illinois law, and federal class actions.
`
`70.
`
`A class action is superior to other methods of adjudication. The Class seeks injunctive
`
`relief applicable to the Class as a whole; due to the complexity of the claims, individual actions
`
`are not likely to be economically feasible; based on the possibility of a very large Class size,
`
`individual litigation would be a burden on the courts and result in delay and inconsistent results.
`
`Relief Sought
`
`COUNT I – DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF – ALL DEFENDANTS
`
`71.
`
`72.
`
`Plaintiff restates and alleges the above paragraphs, 1-70, as if set forth fully herein.
`
`Plaintiff and the Class seek a declaration:
`
`a.
`
`that Clearview’s business methods and database are an ongoing violation of the
`
`Illinois Biometric Privacy Act;
`
`73.
`
`Plaintiff and the Class seek a court order:
`
`
`
`Case: 1:20-cv-00846 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/05/20 Page 12 of 15 PageID #:1
`
`a.
`
`to command Clearview to expunge, delete, and/or remove all information
`
`associated in any way with any member of the Class from their database or any other data
`
`collection;
`
`b.
`
`to restrain Clearview from scraping or harvesting any information related to any
`
`member of the class from any source at any time now or in the future;
`
`c.
`
`to command Clearview to submit to and pay for court-supervised monitoring by a
`
`third-party of their database and data-collection procedures to ensure compliance with
`
`BIPA and any other order of the court;
`
`COUNT II – BIOMETRIC INFORMATION PRIVACY ACT – CLEARVIEW AND CDW
`
`74.
`
`75.
`
`Plaintiff restates and alleges the above paragraphs, 1-70, as if set forth fully herein.
`
`Defendants violated BIPA 740 ILCS § 14/15(a) by failing to develop and maintain a
`
`publicly available retention and destruction schedule.
`
`76.
`
`Defendants violated BIPA 740 ILCS § 14/15(b) by obtaining biometric information and
`
`identifiers without making the required disclosures and receiving a written release from each
`
`Class member.
`
`77.
`
`Defendants violated BIPA 740 ILCS § 14/15(c) by selling, leasing, trading, or otherwise
`
`profiting from the Plaintiff’s and Class member’s biometric information and identifiers.
`
`78.
`
`Defendants violated BIPA 740 ILCS § 14/15(d) by disclosing, re-disclosing, and
`
`otherwise disseminating Plaintiff’s and Class members’ biometric identifiers and information
`
`where the individuals did not consent to such disclosure and it was not: a) part of a financial
`
`transaction; b) required by any law; or, c) pursuant to a valid warrant or subpoena.
`
`79.
`
`As a direct result of these violations, Plaintiff and the Class suffered and continue to
`
`suffer injury and actual, economic, and emotional damages.
`
`
`
`Case: 1:20-cv-00846 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/05/20 Page 13 of 15 PageID #:1
`
`80.
`
`Plaintiff and the Class seek:
`
`a.
`
`$1,000 for the Plaintiff and each member of the class for each and every separate
`
`negligent violation;
`
`b.
`
`$5,000 for the Plaintiff and each member of the class for each and every separate
`
`intentional or reckless violation;
`
`c.
`
`d.
`
`e.
`
`punitive damages;
`
`costs, expenses, and reasonable attorneys’ fees;
`
`and, any other relief this court deems proper.
`
`COUNT III – ILLINOIS CONSUMER FRAUD AND UNFAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES
`
`ACT – CLEARVIEW AND CDW
`
`81.
`
`At all times relevant, Defendants were engaged in trade or commerce in the state:
`
`Clearview and CDW leased, sold, or otherwise provided, for profit, access to the surveillance
`
`database to agencies within Illinois such as the CPD.
`
`82.
`
`At all times relevant, Plaintiff and members of the class were consumers within the
`
`meaning of ICFA.
`
`83.
`
`Defendants practice of unauthorized scraping or harvesting of Plaintiff’s and the Class
`
`members’ photos, videos, private and personal information, and its conversion into biometric
`
`information and identifiers to add to their surveillance database is an unfair practice.
`
`84.
`
`This practice has caused substantial injury and harm to Plaintiff and the members of the
`
`Class. It has also forced the Plaintiff to retain counsel to force Clearview to comply with BIPA
`
`and redress other violations of state law.
`
`85.
`
`Plaintiff and the Class seek:
`
`a.
`
`actual damages;
`
`
`
`Case: 1:20-cv-00846 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/05/20 Page 14 of 15 PageID #:1
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`d.
`
`punitive damages;
`
`costs, expenses, and reasonable attorneys’ fees;
`
`and, any other relief this court deems proper.
`
`COUNT IV – CONVERSION – CLEARVIEW AND CDW
`
`86.
`
`Plaintiff and each Class member have a personal property right in their biometric
`
`information and identifiers.
`
`87.
`
`Defendants assumed control over the biometric information and identifiers of Plaintiff and
`
`the Class with their knowledge or authorization. Defendants’ actions impaired Plaintiff and Class
`
`members’ exclusive right to control their property.
`
`88.
`
`Plaintiff and the Class seek:
`
`a.
`
`the greater of actual damages or the profits gained by CDW and Clearview from
`
`the conversion of Plaintiff and Class members property;
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`punitive damages;
`
`and, any other relief this court deems proper.
`
`Jury Demand
`
`Plaintiff demands a trial by jury.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`February 5, 2020
`
`
`
`[Signature Page Follows]
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case: 1:20-cv-00846 Document #: 1 Filed: 02/05/20 Page 15 of 15 PageID #:1
`
`Submitted By:
`/s/ Michael W. Drew
`
`Michael Drew
`Neighborhood Legal LLC
`20 N. Clark Street #3300
`Chicago, IL 60602
`312-967-7220
`mwd@neighborhood-legal.com
`
`
`Michael Wood
`Community Lawyers LLC
`20 N. Clark Street, Suite 3100
`Chicago, IL 60602
`Tel (312) 757-1880
`mwood@communitylawyersgroup.com
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`