Thomson Reuters Corporation has reached a preliminary settlement agreement of $27.5 million with activists regarding the privacy infringement lawsuit on its database product CLEAR. The settlement allows California residents to join a class-action lawsuit and potentially profit from it.
Senior Judge Edward M. Chen of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted preliminary approval on October 11 to the settlement agreement brought by Oakland residents Cat Brooks and Rasheed Shabazz against Thomson Reuters Corporation. A final decision on the agreement will be made at a hearing scheduled for February 13, 2025.
Residents of California who lived there between December 3, 2016, and October 31, 2024, are eligible to opt in or out of the class-action lawsuit and claim between $19 and $48 per person before December 6 this year. While Thomson Reuters Corporation did not admit wrongdoing, it agreed to pay the $27.5 million settlement fee, limit access to the data of California residents stored in its database, and make it easier to delete such data.
In March 2020, Gibbs Law Group and Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, representing the two plaintiffs, filed the lawsuit. Cohen Milstein specializes in large-scale class-action lawsuits, previously handling cases against former President Trump and successfully blocking the Trump administration’s revocation of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.
The lawsuit alleges that Thomson Reuters collected personal confidential information of millions of California residents and sold access rights to law enforcement agencies, government entities, and private companies without people’s knowledge or consent. According to Gibbs Law Group, The Washington Post found in 2021 that Thomson Reuters sold personal information to government entities including the Department of Justice, Department of Homeland Security, and Department of Defense. The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement used its CLEAR database to track down immigration violations and deport residents, a process typically requiring a warrant to access such personal information.
The CLEAR database reportedly includes information from the internet such as personal details from social media, blogs, and chat rooms, as well as data from third-party brokers and law enforcement agencies including real-time mobile records, credit agency data, DMV records, location data from license plate scans, reservation information, arrest records, immigration records, and more. The law firms also mentioned the possible inclusion of abortion records, weapon registration records, or sexual history records.
In November 2023, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Thomson Reuters’ appeal, leading the case to continue in federal district court. Thomson Reuters Corporation, a multinational information group headquartered in Canada, was established following Thomson Corporation’s acquisition of Reuters Group in 2008.
According to its CLEAR product description, individuals wishing to investigate corporate security, compliance, and risks, as well as government fraud, insurance fraud, or healthcare fraud, typically search through vast public and proprietary records databases. CLEAR offers a simple, efficient search result with specific preferences and risk settings.
Judge Edward M. Chen, nominated by former President Obama three times between August 2009 and January 2011, was appointed as a federal judge for the Northern District of California in May 2011 after two Senate rejections. In 2022, he became a senior judge. He presided over cases such as the shooting of an African American youth by a transit police officer after receiving a report of a brawl on a subway train, and whether Uber drivers are independent contractors.
The two plaintiffs, Brooks and Shabazz, may each receive compensation of $5,000 pending final approval by the judge. Brooks, an activist, playwright, poet, and theater artist of African descent, ran for Oakland mayor in 2018. She is also an organizer of the Black Lives Matter movement and founded anti-police violence projects in Oakland. Shabazz, an African American creative cultural communicator, educator, and multimedia journalist, served as a board member at the Alameda Museum.
Brooks stated that due to her activism in Black and Brown communities, she has been a target of white supremacist groups, expressing concerns about personal identity leaks. She believes the settlement will help other Californians understand the CLEAR platform and easily delete their personal information from CLEAR and its sources.
Shabazz mentioned in a statement that the settlement agreement met his expectations by requiring Thomson Reuters to take measures to protect the privacy of Californians when operating CLEAR.
According to Gibbs Law Group, the court recognized the significant harm of losing control over personal information. The court agreed with the law firm that this case meets the requirements for a class-action lawsuit, which can continue to challenge Thomson Reuters for unauthorized selling of access rights to members’ information.
Four options are available for those involved in the case: 1) submit a claim form, accept the settlement agreement, and receive compensation; 2) do nothing, relinquishing the right to the settlement; 3) opt-out, allowing you to file another lawsuit against Thomson Reuters on the same issue; 4) object, informing the court of your reasons for disliking the settlement, but remaining part of the class-action lawsuit unless opting out. If choosing to object, a claim form must be submitted to receive compensation. Links for choosing options:
https://clearprivacysettlement.com/home
. Link for claiming:
https://clearprivacysettlement.com/submit-claim
.
Not taking any action will result in no compensation, but individuals will be bound by the settlement agreement and its “release” terms, prohibiting the initiation, continuation, or participation in any other lawsuits against Thomson Reuters.