Price

Price v. Carnival Corporation

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaJanuary 19, 20243:23-cv-00236California6,593 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

BACKGROUND

23 Carnival, “the world’s largest leisure travel company,” maintains a website at 24 carnival.com where users may browse and book cruises. On carnival.com, no action goes 25 unnoticed. Every click is counted, every keystroke is collected, and every cursor 26 movement is catalogued. Carnival explains that this constant surveillance “improve[s]” 27 the user experience, ECF No. 23 (“Motion to Dismiss” or “MTD”) at 12,1 but Plaintiffs prefer to browse in privacy, and bring suit alleging that Carnival has violated federal wiretap and hacking laws and seven state analogues. Plaintiffs allege that Carnival enlists third-party companies to embed recording software, often referred to as “Session Replay Code,” on Carnival’s website. ECF No. 22 (“First Amended Complaint” or “FAC”) at ¶¶ 1, 67. One such party is Microsoft. Id. at ¶ 51. Microsoft calls its Session Replay Code, “Clarity,” and embeds Clarity on Carnival’s “website, either by directly hard-coding the code on the website or through a third-party platform . . . .” Id. at ¶ 59. When a user visits the website, Clarity is “deploy[ed]” onto the user’s browser. Id. at ¶ 50. …

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.