Court Dismisses Privacy Lawsuit Against GoFundMe
A federal judge ruled that plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a concrete injury from the company's data tracking practices.
Updated on Oct. 27, 2026 in Philanthropy
Live Poll
Should companies be liable for tracking data after you have explicitly opted out of cookies?
The United States District Court for the Northern District of California has dismissed a privacy lawsuit against GoFundMe. The judge ruled that the plaintiffs failed to establish Article III standing because the alleged unauthorized data tracking did not constitute a concrete injury.
Why it matters
The ruling underscores the rigorous legal threshold for proving harm in digital privacy cases. It clarifies that tracking data like IP addresses and browser information may not meet the requirements for a concrete injury in federal court.
The court dismissed the class action under case number 26-CV-01217-TLT. The ruling cited legal precedents including the decision in Popa v. Microsoft Corp, 153 F.4th 784.
The players
GoFundMe
This is a prominent for-profit crowdfunding platform that allows people to raise money for various personal and charitable causes.
Sal Munoz
He is a plaintiff who initiated the legal challenge against the crowdfunding company regarding its data privacy policies.
Shirley Vanasch
She is a co-plaintiff who joined the lawsuit alleging that the company violated the California Invasion of Privacy Act.
The details
Plaintiffs Sal Munoz and Shirley Vanasch claimed GoFundMe shared data with third parties despite users opting out via a cookie-consent banner. The court found that sharing information like IP addresses and site navigation data did not qualify as sensitive or highly offensive under current legal standards.
Timeline
October 14, 2026: The court issued the decision in Vanasch v. GoFundMe.
Market Landscape
This dismissal follows a trend of federal courts narrowing the scope of privacy litigation against tech platforms. It highlights a recurring hurdle for plaintiffs attempting to sue over data sharing practices under the California Invasion of Privacy Act.
While the court cleared the company of these specific privacy claims, users should remain mindful of cookie-consent banners when navigating websites. This ruling confirms that current privacy standards in California may not offer immediate legal recourse for every instance of automated data sharing.
The takeaway
This case highlights that digital privacy claims must meet specific federal injury standards to proceed in court. Readers should continue to review site-specific privacy settings if they wish to limit the amount of browsing data shared with third-party tracking services.
Further reading
For more on the intersection of technology and charitable platforms, visit Philanthropy.
Live Poll
Should companies be liable for tracking data after you have explicitly opted out of cookies?
