Pixels & Web Privacy
Premium
$500
Sealed by May 25, 2026 · FRE 901 chain of custody ·
Site state has likely changed
Sealed forensic record · Report #431
What's for sale here is a dated, hashed snapshot of a defendant's live tracking behavior, marketing representations, and consent UX, sealed under FRE 901 chain of custody on the day we captured it. Defendants rewrite their policies and pull their pixels the moment a complaint lands — this record is the only proof of what the site was doing before.
Case at a glance
LocationU.S. · operates nationally
Nat'l classCalif. statewide — CIPA is state law
ArbitrationArb risk — mass-arbitration target
ClaimsCIPA / California Wiretap Act / Pen-Trap / VPPA
**CIPA / California Wiretap Act / Pen-Trap / VPPA — Consumer Platform**
Third-party tracking infrastructure captured across ~15–25 pages of sealed documentation. Agent identified 201 tracker fires during the run. Two accessibility violations were also documented. No verbatim representations of data-handling practices were secured. Chain-of-custody maintained across 15 screenshots embedded in sealed PDF.
Case theory: CIPA / Wiretap / VPPA
What you receive
- Sealed PDF report (typical 15–28 pp) with full chain of custody — SHA-256 + RFC 3161 timestamps on every artifact
- Verbatim binding representations with Wayback-anchored class-period bounds
- Full network capture: every tracker fire, sensitive transmission, identity-sync event
- Wrap classification: BROWSEWRAP / CLICKWRAP / SIGN-IN-WRAP verdict + Specht-line alignment
- Per-circuit case-law alignment (LIKELY_UNENFORCEABLE / LIKELY_ENFORCEABLE / JURISDICTIONALLY_DEPENDENT)
- Defendant name + domain — revealed at purchase
✓ Prior-litigation check: clear.
No prior plaintiff-class filing found against this defendant on this theory
(CourtListener federal + web search of state courts, checked 2026-06-07).
No same-kind case against this defendant (federal RECAP + web, <3yr).
No same-kind case against this defendant (federal RECAP + web, <3yr).