United States: A Look At Manufacturer Liability For The Internet Of Things

Last Updated: October 10 2016
Article by John E. Clabby and Joseph W. Swanson

The internet of things refers to the connection of everyday objects to the internet or other networks. Some common examples are home thermostats, smart TVs, wireless home cameras, and even refrigerators that can tell when a household is running low on milk. By some estimates, the number of connected devices in use will increase by 5.5 million devices per day to exceed 6.4 billion devices by the end of 2016.1

For industry, the opportunity to manufacture and profit from connected products comes with complications. The typical manufacturer of such high-tech devices has long protected and secured its own internal network — that is, it has closed and locked the door to its business. But each day that same business churns out thousands of unlocked, open windows in the form of unsecured, internet-connected consumer goods that invite hackers to do harm.

There is a serious risk that in racing these smart devices to market, companies will fail during the research and development phase to vet them for vulnerabilities to hacking attacks. Once on the market, these vulnerabilities may be exploited by hackers, and that could mean significant legal liability for manufacturers in the form of class actions and other litigation. This article summarizes and briefly analyzes recent litigation across several industries, and then makes some predictions and suggestions as to manufacturer liability for products that are part of the IoT.


Plaintiffs firms have a great deal of experience suing automakers, so it is not surprising that two of the first major lawsuits concerning the IoT are putative class actions against automakers. The largest two have come to arguably contrary results on standing, which is emerging as a major issue in these cases.

The first is a putative class action against Ford Motor Co., General Motors and Toyota. In Cahen v. Toyota Motor Corp., 3:15-cv-01104 (N.D. Cal. March 10, 2015), the plaintiffs alleged, among other claims, that these manufacturers equipped their vehicles with computer technology that is vulnerable to hacking. According to the complaint, a hacker can communicate remotely (through Bluetooth or cellphone) with the small network of computers controlling many of the vehicles' functions, resulting in a complete loss of driver control over steering, accelerating, and braking. The plaintiffs claimed that the manufacturers were aware of these security vulnerabilities but nonetheless touted their products as safe. As such, plaintiffs asserted that Ford, GM and Toyota breached, among other things, the implied warranty of merchantability and contract/common law warranty as well as committed fraud.

The auto companies moved to dismiss on grounds that included lack of standing. The defendants argued "that plaintiffs do not allege any hacking incidents that have taken place outside of controlled settings, and that the entire threat rests on the speculative premise that a sophisticated third party cybercriminal may one day successfully hack one of plaintiffs' vehicles."2 Citing traditional automobile product liability cases, the court agreed, determining that the potential risk of future hacking was not an injury in fact.3 Nor was the court persuaded that standing could be supplied because of a "benefit of the bargain theory," holding: "The plaintiffs have not, for example, alleged a demonstrable effect on the market for their specific vehicles based on documented recalls or declining Kelley Bluebook values."4 Plaintiffs have appealed the dismissal to the Ninth Circuit.

The second major lawsuit is against Chrysler Group. In Flynn v. FCA US LLC., 3:15-cv-855 (S.D. Ill. Aug. 4, 2015), the plaintiffs sought damages stemming from an alleged security flaw in "infotainment" centers manufactured by co-defendant Harman International Industries and installed in certain RAM, Chrysler, Jeep and Dodge vehicles. The complaint alleges that the infotainment system is "exceedingly hackable," permits hackers to "remotely take control" of the steering, acceleration, and braking, and lacks the ability quickly and effectively for software security flaws to be "patched." The 17-count complaint alleges negligence, fraud, and various violations of warranties.

The defendants moved to dismiss, citing among other things the speculative nature of the damages. The court on Sept. 23, 2016, dismissed certain claims and trimmed others. The court held, as in Cahen, that plaintiffs lacked standing to seek damages for risk of future hacking. But unlike Cahen, the Flynn court held that the plaintiffs had standing to sue for damages for the diminished value of the car because "the ongoing vulnerabilities have reduced the market value of their vehicles." What might have made the difference in Flynn was a 2015 article in Wired magazine drawing attention to the vulnerability5 — alleged to have had a real impact on resale prices — and allegations in the complaint that the recall did not fix all the vulnerabilities of the system.

Children's Tech

Another area of early action for this type of consumer litigation is in web-connected children's toys, likely because of the headline-grabbing impact of any hack that involves children's privacy.

Perhaps the most prominent example is a lawsuit in Illinois federal court against certain VTech entities, which manufacture children's learning toys that link to certain web-based services.6 According to papers in the case, in November 2015, an overseas hacker illegally bypassed VTech's security measures, obtained customer data from the web services (including profile pictures, emails, passwords and nicknames), and provided the data to a technology journalist. The hacker was arrested shortly thereafter.

The technology journalist who broke the story was quoted in the complaint as writing: "[VTech] left thousands of pictures of parents and kids and a year's worth of chat logs stored online in a way easily accessible to hackers." The plaintiffs alleged, among other claims, breach of contract, breach of the warranty of merchantability, and violations of state consumer protection law. Similar to the plaintiffs in the automobile cases, the plaintiffs alleged an increased risk of harm and that the value of the products had diminished.

In April 2016, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss alleging that the plaintiffs had suffered no actual injury, as the plaintiff did not plead that the data traveled beyond the hacker, the journalist, and a security analyst, and, as such, that plaintiffs lacked standing. The defense argument was that there was no allegation the hacker intended or accomplished any harm beyond pointing out the vulnerability. The defendants' motion to dismiss is pending.

Another connected toy that led to litigation is "Hello Barbie." In that case, according to the complaint first filed in Superior Court in Los Angeles, the doll was designed to engage in conversation with a child, record each conversation, and collect and store the recordings in the cloud.7 The complaint alleged that security issues had been discovered, including a vulnerability through which a hacker could "impersonate a doll in order to lure an unsuspecting user into connecting to and supply[ing] user information to an impersonated doll." Similar to the above automobile cases, there was no allegation of actual malicious hacking of the accounts or misuse of the goods in the manner identified that caused direct harm to plaintiffs.

Nonetheless, plaintiffs alleged negligence, unfair competition and privacy violations against the doll's manufacturer Mattel Inc., and ToyTalk Inc., which managed the companion online application. The defendants removed to federal court, and filed motions to dismiss based on standing and other grounds, and also moved to compel arbitration.[8] The court never ruled on the motions because plaintiffs agreed to dismiss the case with prejudice.

Medical Devices

Connected pacemakers and other cardiac devices are another area where plaintiffs are testing the waters of mass actions. In Ross v. St. Jude Medical Inc., No. 2:16-cv-06465 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 26, 2016), the products being challenged are a variety of St. Jude Medical's implants — including pacemakers, defibrillators and heart resynchronizers — that use radiofrequency wireless technology. This feature allows the implanted devices to be monitored remotely with in-home equipment, reducing visits to the doctor's office. In this putative class action, the plaintiff cites a "report" alleging that these cardiac devices and the in-home transmitter used to connect to them allegedly lacked even the "most basic security defenses." The plaintiff claims that the devices are exposed to potential attacks in which hackers could disable the device or drain its battery. St. Jude is vigorously contesting the allegations and has even filed a separate defamation action against the issuers of the report that led to the putative class action.

Meanwhile, the plaintiff in the product liability case alleges breach of express warranty, fraudulent concealment, negligence, and unjust enrichment. While this products case is in its infancy, it will be important to monitor, given the ubiquity of these medical devices and the potential legal exposure if the claims proceed.

Home Security Systems

The last place one might expect to find network security risks are within a home security system, yet that is exactly what is alleged in Baker v. ADT Corp., No. 2:15-cv-02038 (C.D. Ill. Nov. 9, 2014). The plaintiff filed this class action alleging that ADT's wireless security and monitoring equipment — which ADT advertised as secure and reliable — could be remotely turned on or off using technology readily available to the public. In addition, plaintiff claimed that third parties "can also hack into ADT's wireless systems and use customers' own security cameras to unknowingly spy on them."

The plaintiff alleged that his system was hacked at least twice by an unauthorized third party, which "caused the system to be falsely triggered, which in turn caused ADT to contact Plaintiff and have the police called to Plaintiff's home." But rather than quantify any particular harm that flowed from those "false alarms," the plaintiff's allegations focused instead on several of ADT's marketing statements, including that ADT's monitoring centers were "equipped with secure communication links." His suit alleged violations of the Florida and Illinois consumer fraud statutes and claims for strict product liability and unjust enrichment.

The defendants' motion to dismiss turned not on standing but, in part, on the legal sufficiency of claims based on marketing statements, including arguing that many of the statements as to security were "puffery." In October 2015, the court granted the motion to dismiss in part, dismissing the strict liability count, but leaving unjust enrichment. The court kept only those portions of the consumer fraud counts based on the "secure communication links" language in the advertising. This case continues to progress through discovery.

The Future of IoT Liability

Initial standing problems have stalled many of the early cases that are testing manufacturer liability when it comes to the IoT. This is a function of "gray hat" hackers, working with or without journalists and plaintiffs, who identify the vulnerabilities without doing any additional harm with the data collected. In many ways, the centrality of standing tracks some of the first consumer data breach cases, in which plaintiffs fought to prove actual injury based only on a risk that their compromised data would be used to commit identity theft and other fraud but could show no tangible loss.

But the potential for real harm from the IoT's vulnerabilities makes the modern, personal-information-only data breach cases — presenting only a harm that in many instances can be ameliorated with identity theft restoration services — look less significant. After all, in an IoT case, allegations of the failure of life-prolonging medical implants, the vulnerability of automobile steering systems, and the privacy of residential security cameras, will no doubt scare judges and juries alike. That could mean huge damage awards against manufacturers and anyone else in their supply chain if these cases reach trial.

Companies should integrate into product design for internet-enabled consumer goods both the appropriate systems security and the appropriate legal security, including as necessary waivers, "clickwrap," and other assumptions-of-the-risk mechanisms that are now standard practice in the sale of software. For software-supported items, like connected automobiles, much of what had been accomplished through recalls can now be accomplished through remote patching, just like the updating of a desktop computer's security software.

Companies should also consider liability-shifting provisions in their agreements with vendors that administer or manufacture the "connected" portion of their Internet-connected products. Lastly, traditional cost shifting in the form of appropriate insurance coverage should be a part of any company's management of IoT liability. The bottom line is that, while the IoT poses great opportunities for manufacturers, its risks should not be overlooked in the race to get the next big product to market.

The authors thank Tampa associate Colton Peterson for his research in support of this article.


1 Rob Van der Meulen, Gartner Says 6.4 Billion Connected "Things" Will Be in Use in 2016, Up 30 Percent From 2015, Gartner.com (Nov. 10, 2015), http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/3165317.

2 Cahen v. Toyota, 147 F. Supp. 3d 955, 966 (N.D. Cal. 2015).

3 Id. at 966-69, 974.

4 Id. at 970-71.

5 Andy Greenberg, "Hackers Remotely Kill a Jeep on the Highway – With Me in It," Wired (July 21, 2015), https://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-highway/.

6 In re: VTech Data Breach Litigation, No. 1:15-CV-10889 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 3, 2015).

7 Archer-Hayes v. ToyTalk, Inc., No. BC603467, 2015 WL 8304161 (Cal. Super. Dec. 7, 2015).

8 Archer-Hayes v. ToyTalk, Inc., No. 2:16-cv-02111 (C.D. Cal.).

Republished with permission by Law360 (subscription required).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions