MSG Facial Recognition Litigation (Gross v. Madison Square Garden)

On April 21, 2023, Aaron Gross’ lawsuit against Madison Square Garden Entertainment Corp. (MSG) was filed in a federal court in Manhattan alleging that MSG has violated New York City’s Biometric Identifier Information Law and New York State Civil Rights Law by subjecting MSG’s customers to facial recognition for trade purposes and allegedly sharing facial recognition data with a third party. The action was amended on June 9, 2023.

Aaron Gross and Jacob Blumenkrantz, the named plaintiffs, seek to represent a proposed class action of millions of people who were subjected to MSG’s facial recognition practices. As the Complaint alleges, MSG operates its facial recognition system so that it can implement its litigation deterrence policy under which MSG bans lawyers who have active legal actions against MSG (as well as the people who work at those lawyers’ firms) from entering MSG’s venues. By applying facial recognition to all customers who try to enter MSG’s venues, MSG is able to identify the lawyers who are banned and prevent them from entering MSG’s venues.

The complaint alleges that to operate its facial recognition system, MSG shares facial scan data with a third party in violation of New York City Administrative Code Section 22-1202(b), which prohibits sharing customers’ biometric identifier information in exchange for anything of value or otherwise profiting from such information. The complaint also alleges that operating a facial recognition system to improve MSG’s bottom line by deterring litigation against MSG violates Section 50 and 51 of the New York Civil Rights Law, which prohibits using customers’ pictures for trade purposes without written consent.

The plaintiffs and proposed class are represented by PRF Law, Israel David LLC, and Pollock Cohen LLP.

The case is known as Gross v. Madison Square Garden Entertainment Corp, No. 23 Civ. 03380 (S.D.N.Y.), and is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

Update: On January 9, 2024, Magistrate Judge James Cott denied in part MSG’s motion dismiss.

Case Documents

Media

Previous
Previous

VA’s Denial of IVF Benefits to Veterans in Same-Sex Marriages (Sheffield v. Dept. ofVeterans Affairs)

Next
Next

Amazon & Starbucks Biometric Surveillance Litigation (Mallouk v. Amazon & Starbucks)