Apple Inc. v. Superior Court
56 Cal. 4th 128
| Cal. | 2013Background
- Section 1747.08 prohibits retailers from requesting or recording personal identification information (PII) in credit card transactions, with statutory definitions and exceptions.
- Pineda v. Williams-Sonoma held ZIP codes are PII and barred unless an exception applies, establishing privacy protections in brick-and-mortar contexts.
- Krescent sued Apple for online purchases of downloadable media, alleging it required his address and telephone number to complete credit card transactions.
- The trial court overruled Apple’s demurrer; the Court of Appeal granted review to address whether online (card-not-present) transactions fall within 1747.08.
- The majority held 1747.08 does not apply to online purchases of electronically downloadable products, distinguishing online from in-person (and other) transactions.
- Dissent argues the statute’s plain terms apply to online sales and that the majority rewrites the law to exempt online commerce from privacy protections.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 1747.08 applies to online downloads | Krescent: statute covers all credit-card transactions, including online. | Apple: text/purpose predate online commerce; no online applicability. | Online downloads fall outside 1747.08. |
| Does legislative history show applicability to online transactions | Pineda and history support broad privacy protections including online. | Historical amendments show narrow gas-station exception; unclear for online. | History does not mandate online applicability; statute read as a whole limits reach to online. |
| Does COPPA or other online privacy regimes inform interpretation | Online privacy protections exist in COPPA and other regimes; should influence scope. | COPPA is disclosure-focused and does not expand 1747.08; online scope remains limited. | COPPA does not extend 1747.08; does not change the interpretation that online downloads are outside 1747.08. |
Key Cases Cited
- Pineda v. Williams-Sonoma Stores, Inc., 51 Cal.4th 524 (Cal. 2011) (privacy protections; ZIP code as personal identification information)
- O’Grady v. Superior Court, 139 Cal.App.4th 1423 (Cal. App. 2006) (online materials; statutory interpretation in light of technology)
- Slocum v. Ni, 196 Cal.App.4th 1636 (Cal. App. 2011) (electronic signatures; statutory schemes and technology adaptation)
- Costco Wholesale Corp. v. Superior Court, 47 Cal.4th 725 (Cal. 2009) (ejusdem generis; interpretation of general terms)