Court OK's Apple demand for credit card data, cell phone number from consumers
Related
Top Stories
- Spot-fixing: Petition in SC seeks stay on IPL matches, seeks SIT probe
- India, China call for end to incursion issue, sign 8 deals to boost ties
- Sanjay Dutt spends restless nights as officials yet to decide on his jail
- Aarushi murder case: Rajesh Talwar claims he was asleep when killings took place
- Railgate: BJP protests against CBI DIG for shielding Pawan Bansal

Apple Inc and other online retailers did not break California law by requiring consumers to provide their address and phone numbers as a condition of accepting credit card payments, the state's high court ruled on Monday.
In a split decision, the California Supreme Court said state privacy protections for credit cards do not apply to online purchases that are downloaded electronically.
The ruling comes after the same court in 2011 said that those privacy protections do apply to brick and mortar retailers, finding that they could not request a customer's ZIP code during a credit card transaction.
Apple was the defendant in the latest lawsuit, brought as a proposed class action by a consumer who purchased downloads from iTunes.
Online retailers eBay Inc and Wal-Mart Stores Inc also filed briefs supporting Apple.
An Apple spokeswoman declined to comment, and an attorney for the plaintiff could not be reached.
Three dissenting California Supreme Court justices argued that the ruling represents "a major win for these sellers, but a major loss for consumers, who in their online activities already face an ever-increasing encroachment upon their privacy."
But the four justices in the majority disagreed. "These ominous assertions, though eye-catching, do not withstand scrutiny," Justice Goodwin Liu wrote.
Other state and federal privacy laws protect against disclosure of personal identification information, Liu wrote for the majority. Additionally, electronic retailers need more safeguards against fraud than traditional shops.
"Unlike a brick-and-mortar retailer, an online retailer cannot visually inspect the credit card, the signature on the back of the card, or the customer's photo identification," Liu wrote.
The case in the Supreme Court of California is Apple Inc vs. The Superior Court of Los Angeles County and David Krescent.
Editors’ Pick
- Former Ranji player among 3 more held
- Rajasthan Royals to file FIR against tainted trio
- If found guilty, BCCI to ask ICC to erase Sreesanth records
- Top cops among 42 named in death of blast accused
- Manmohan-Li talks: PM takes tough line on incursion issue
- Security forces blame Maoists, villagers say CoBRA man was killed in 'friendly fire'
- Travellers’ nightmare: Yellow fever vaccine stocks run out, production unit awaits repair


Tata group to launch Croma 3G tablets in next 2 weeks
Baboons understand numbers like humans
I-limb: App lets amputees program their own bionic hands
Jurassic baby dinosaur discovered in China




















