直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • Articles & Books
    • Ad Law Buzz Blog
    • At the PTAB Blog
    • European IP Blog
    • Federal Circuit IP Blog
    • INCONTESTABLE® Blog
    • Prosecution First Blog
  • Events & Webinars
  • IP Updates
  • Podcasts
    • AI + Finnegan
    • AI + Copyright
    • AI + Patent
    • AI + Privacy
    • AI + Trade Secrets
    • AI + Trademark
  • Unified Patent Court (UPC) Hub

Article

Litigation Landscape for Cookie and Tracking Technology Claims Brought Under Federal Privacy Statutes

January 21, 2026

Cybersecurity Law Report

By Lynn Parker Dupree; Victor M. Palace

Lynn Parker Dupree and Victor Palace provide a comprehensive overview of how federal courts are applying major privacy laws to modern cookie and tracking technologies and how these decisions affect compliance and litigation. They review the Wiretap Act, Stored Communications Act, Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and Video Privacy Protection Act, analyze how differing interpretations and statutory limits influence online‑tracking claims, and offer practical insights to help businesses and legal teams understand risk, strengthen governance practices, and navigate the evolving regulatory environment surrounding digital tracking tools.

 

Click here to read more. 

Related Practices

Diligence, Licensing, and Opinions

Privacy

Global IP Enforcement, Litigation, and Trials

Trademark Litigation and Trials

Patent Litigation and Trials

Related Industries

AI, Electronics, and Information Technology

Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML)

Communications

Media

Consumer Goods and Services

Related Offices

Washington, DC

Related Professionals

Lynn Parker Dupree
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4462
Email
Victor M. Palace
Associate
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4117
Email

Originally printed in Cybersecurity Law Report on January 21, 2026. This article is for informational purposes, is not intended to constitute legal advice, and may be considered advertising under applicable state laws. This article is only the opinion of the authors and is not attributable to Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, or the firm’s client.

Related Insights

Conference

4th Global Patent Litigation FORUM

October 29, 2026

Munich

Webinar

PTAB Developments and Their Impact on Parallel Litigation: Strategic Considerations

August 26, 2026

Webinar

Articles

Privacy Law Mid-Year Update: Key EU and UK Data Protection Decisions

August 13, 2026

Articles

Blaker v. NetScout Systems: A Narrow Reading of the Pen Register and Trap and Trace Provisions of the California Invasion of Privacy Act in California State Court

July 29, 2026

Articles

Article_D.-Mass-Patent-Litigation-Update-October-2024

D. Mass. Patent Litigation Update: June 2026

July 28, 2026

Webinar

Chutian Safeguard Series Navigating U.S. Section 337 Investigations and UPC Patent Litigation in Europe

July 24, 2026

Webinar

Articles

This Article Was Written Entirely by AI — Welcome to Synthetic Patent Litigation

July/August 2026

Webinar

Early Motions in Trade Secret Litigation – Offensive and Defensive Insights

July 15, 2026

Webinar

Federal Circuit IP Blog

Federal Circuit Vacates and Remands Infringement and Damages Judgment After Erroneous Verdict Form and Eligibility Analysis

July 8, 2026

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP