ADT Alleges “No Control” Over ADT "Sexual Gratification" Technician

By Isabella Cheng, Published Feb 16, 2021, 08:42am EST

ADT filed to dismiss a class-action lawsuit and claimed it had "no control" over its technician's actions, who pleaded guilty to hacking surveillance video 9,600+ times for "sexual gratification."

IPVM Image

In this note, we examine the court filings, ADT's claims, the court's response, and whether ADT truly had 'no control' of what it described as an 'unforeseeable' event.

ADT ***** ***** ****** *******

** *** **, ****, Shana ********* * ***** ****** complaint ******* ***, "***** ** *** intentional *** ********* ******** acts ** ********* ******** services ** *** ********* with ******-******* ************."

IPVM Image

**** *** ********* ** April **** ** *** and *** **** *** installation ********** *** **** his ****** ****** ** spy ** *** ******, including *** ***** ***, an "******* ****** ** times":

IPVM Image

** **** ****, **** filed ********* ***** ****** *********, ***** ***** ********* Aviles, *** ********* **********, alongside *** ** * defendant.

Main ****** ** ********* ******* ***

******** ***** **** ** causes ** ****** ***** against ***, *** ***** and ****** ****** *** most ***********: ***'* ****** of ******** *** **********.

******** ****** *** ******** its ******** **** *** customers "** ******* ** acknowledge *** ******** ************* in *** *** ***** system *** *** ******* of * ***** ***** to ****** *** ******** system *** ******* ********* security ******* ********* **** locks *** *******." ***'* failure ** ****** **** contract ***** ******* *** plaintiff ** *********** *******:

IPVM Image

***'* ******** **** *** actually ******** *** ******** or ******** ** *** services ******** ** ***, but *** ********* ****** there ** * ***** "implied ********" ** *** contract *** * ****** security ******:

IPVM Image

*** ********* **** ****** ADT *** ********* *** had *** **** ** make **** ********** **** in ***** *** *** systems ** ** ******. Further, ** *** *********** that ********* ***** ** at **** ** *** did *** **** ****** security ********* ** *****.

IPVM Image

Court ****** *** ******* ** *******

** ******* **, ****, ADT***** ** ********** ** *** *********'* claims. *** ***** *** already******* ***'* ****** ** dismiss *** ****** ****, with **** ** *** plaintiff's ****** ******* *** others ******.

******** *** ****** **** it ***** *** ** held *********** *** ** "implied ********" ** * contract, *** ***** ***** it ** ********** **** ADT's ******* ******** ******* that ** ***** **** secure *******, ******* "* contract *** * ******** monitoring ******* **** ** itself ******** ** * contract *** '******* ** all.'"

IPVM Image

*******, *** ***** ***** that *** ********** ***** stands ** ***, ** selling * ******** ****** to ******* *********, **** has * **** ** protect *** ********* **** invasions ** *******:

IPVM Image

*** *********'* ***** *** negligent ******/*********** **** ***** because *** ********** ***** have ********** **** ********* had ** **** ****** supervised:

IPVM Image

ADT **** "** *******"

*******,***'* **-**** ******* *** defense ************* **** **** *** "no *******" **** *** of *** *******.

IPVM Image

ADT **** "*************" ******

** *** ******* *****, ADT **** **** **** caused ** "*************" ****** beyond *** ******* ** ADT.

IPVM Image

Months ****** *** ***** "***** **** **************"

*******, * ****** ******, ADT's ***** ******** ************ *********** ****** ******* ****:

We **** **** ************** *** **** and our goal and our mission from the beginning of this is to regain their trust and their peace of mind. [emphasis added]

***** ***'* ********* ** Inside ******* *****:

*** ******** ** ******* to **** *** *** can ***, ** **, that ** ***** "**** responsibility *** ****' ***** later ********, ** ***** filings, **** **** *** 'no *******' *** **** this *** '*************'.

Lack ** ******** *****

**** ****'* ****** ** the ********* ******** ******** (or **** *******), ** conclude **** * ********* corporation ****** **** ******** and ********* ***** ******** from ********** **** ****:

  • *** **********'* ************ ****** to ******* ** ******* is ********* **** **** on *** **** * years *** *** *** even ********** ** ***, but ** * ******** who ******** ** ****** an ********** ***** ** her *******, *********** ** ***.
  • *** *********** *** ******* to *** ***** *** emails ** *** ****** during ************ *** *******, but ***** ** ** audit ****** ** **** sure **** *** ***** is ***** *** **** the ************ ** ********.
  • ******, ** *** ***'* design ******** ** ***** technicians ** ***** ***** emails ** *** ***** place, ***** ***** **** been ******* ******* *********** management **********, *.*., ****-******* access ** *** ******* only ****** *** ***** of *** ******.
  • *******, *** **** **** not ******* ************* **** emails *** ***** ** the ****** ** **** to ****** *** ******. It ** ********* *********** if *** ***** ****** to *** ***** ***** address ** ******* ** audit ******, **** ***** open *** ****** ** to *****. *** ****** to ********* ****** ********* to ******* ***** ********* from ************ ****** **** there **** **** ********* to ******* **** **** happening.

Plaintiff ********'* *******

*** ** *** *********'* lawyers ********* ** **** saying:

**** ** ****** * for *** ***** ************ industry, ********** **** **'** talking ***** **** ******** systems. ** *** ******** isn’t **** ** ****** that ***** ******* *** secure, **’* **** ** understand *** ** ******** the **** ** ******** trust.

*** ***** ********** ****** we *** ** ****, to *** ********* ** video ************, ******** *********** to ***** ***** ***** addresses **** ******** ******** is ********. *******, *** broader **** ******* ** ensure **** ***** ************ providers *** ******* *********** access *** ***** ********* to **** ***** ************ of ***** ********'* **********.

ADT ** *******

*** **************** *************** ** ******* ** IPVM ******* *** ************* about *** ****** ** "no *******" *** "****** full **************" ** **** as *********** ** ****, if ***, ******* **** been **** ** *** systems ******** ** ***** of *** ******* *********.

Comments (17)

Andrew Myers

02/16/21 02:42pm

****'** ***** **** *** negligence *** ***** ******** is **** **** **** no ******* **** **** their ********* **? ****... What **** ** *********'****** **** ***** **********? "Unforseeable" ******... *****. ** they *****'* ******** *****. THAT ** ******* **** NEGLIGENCE **, ***** ***.

*'* * ****** **** on **** **** ** the ***** ******: "* contract *** * ******** monitoring ******* **** ** itself ******** ** * contract *** '******* ** all.'" ** ** ****, I've ****** **** * distinction ******* ******** ******** and ***** ******** *** to *** ****** ********* skill **** *** ******* involved. *****, * ***** think **** **** ** a**************** ********** ******* **** is **************, ********* *** ******** is *** *** ******* because *** ****** ********* to ******* **********. ** this * *********** **** has ** ***** *****?

Undisclosed Integrator #1

In reply to Andrew Myers | 02/16/21 04:47pm

* *********** ******* ******** security *** ***** ********

**** *********** ** ********* quickly ** ********** *******. You ***'* **** ** be * ***** *** hacker ** *** ******* allows *** ** *** your ***** ******* ** and **** *** **** controls ** ***** ** ensure ************ ****** ** prevented. ** *** ****** is ********** **** ******* outside ** ********** *****, is ** ****** ********** physically? *'* ********** *** a ******, *** ** someone ** ******* ** my **** ******* * don't **** ********** ****** and ***** ****** **** my ******** *** ********. The **** ******** *** use **** ****** ** enter * ********* *** disarm *** ******.

Undisclosed Integrator #2

In reply to Undisclosed Integrator #1 | 02/16/21 05:32pm

**** ******* *** ********* in *** ****, ** order ** *** ************ access *** **** *** to ****** *** *** homeowner ** *** *** email ** *** ****** or ** *** ** do ** ***** ****** as *** *********.

*** ****** ** *** Internet ** *********** ********** to ************ *****, **'* why * **** ******** system *** ******** ****** of **********, *********, *** auditing ** ***** *** possibility.

Undisclosed Integrator #2

In reply to Andrew Myers | 02/16/21 05:28pm

******,

***'* ******** ** * standard **********, ** ********* it, *** *** ********** will **** ** ***** that *** ***** **** forseen ***** ****** *** been **** ** **** action ** ******* **. This **** *** ****** of ***** **** ** the ********** ****** **** ADT. ** ******** ** your ***** "**** *****'* thinking *****", *** **** that **** *** * policy ** ***** ********* that **** **** ********* but ****'* ** *** enough ** ******* **. That ** ***** **********. What ***'** ********** ** a ******* ** ***********, which ** **** ****** to ********* **** **********, you'd ********* **** ** prove **** ****'* ** far ****** **** ***** cyber ********.

* ***** *** ******** in *** ****** ** confusing ******* *** ******** really *** ******* ** do **** *** ******* in **** **** ** I'm *** **** *** it ** **** *********.

** *** *** ******** a ******* ** ******* that ******** ** * network ** *** ********, you *** ***** ** be ******* ****** *** any ******** ******** ** that ******* ** *******, unless *** *** ***** the ******** ********* ************* the ****** ** ***** for * ******. *** can *** ** ***** the ********* *** *** contract *** **** **** of **** ******** *** be **********.

Undisclosed Integrator #2

02/16/21 06:15pm

*/*

John Honovich

IPVM | In reply to Undisclosed Integrator #2 | 02/16/21 06:31pm

**** *** ******** **** it *** ***** **** in **** **** *** tech ** ******** ***** the ********* *** *** email, ***** ***** **** point ****.

** ***** **** ** moot ** ** “***” cases, **** *** *** case. *** *** ******* admitting ****, ** ***** in **** *****, *** technician *** ****** *** directives ** *** ***** email, *******?

*** *** ********** ******* in *** ***** ***** not **** ********* **** because ** **** *****, the ********** ******* "****** engineering" ** *** *** homeowner ** *** *** email ** ***** *******.

*****, *** **** *********, at ***** **** ** these ***** ***** **** been ****** ***** *** all **** ****** ***********, correct? *** ** **** one *** ******, ** could **** ******* *** the ***** ***** ****** it ******* ***?

** *** *** ******** comment, ** ****** ** are ***** ** ******* as ** *** *** them *** ********* **** after **** **** ** they ********. ** **** your *********** ** *** offering ** ** ****** of ***?

Undisclosed Integrator #3

02/16/21 07:53pm

**** **** *********** **** properly ****** ***** *****, ADT *** * **** strong ******** **** ****** liability. **** ** **** even ** *** ***** of ********** ***, *** in *** ***** ** gross **********. ** *** that *** *** **** has ******* ** ** with *** ******** ** to ************* *** ******* of *********. *** ********* between *** ******** *** company ** ***** ** ADT ****** ****'* **** control **** ***** *********.

*** ******** *** ****** back ** ******** ********* to ******* ********* ****** accounts **** ** ****** their *******. *** *******, if ** ** ****** in *** ******** *** technicians ** *** ***** own ***** ******* ** set ** ******** *******, ADT *** * ******** argument **** ** ****** control (****, "********** ******* as ******* ** ******** norms."). ** *** ***** hand, ** ** ** standard *** ********* **** ADT ** ******* *********** advising *** ******** ** remove *** ***** ******* themselves *** ** ****** the ************** ******** ***** the ************ ** ******** (which ** **** * think ****** ** *** policy), **** ***** *** be ** ******** *** gross **********.

*** ***** ** **** lawsuit ** ** **** away *********** ******* *** not ******, ************* *** managing * ****** ****** that ******** ***** ** remove ***** ********* *** to ******* *** ******** instructions ** *** ** change *** ***** *********. While "*******" *** *** include ********, **********, ******** and ************* **** **** to ******* **** **** happening, ***** **** **** many *** ***** ** try ** ****** *********** of ********* **** ** those **** ** ***...**** if *** *** **** failed.

Undisclosed Integrator #4

02/16/21 10:03pm

**** ****'* ****** ** the ********* ******** ******** (or **** *******), ** conclude **** ********************* ****** **** ******** and ********* ***** ******** from ********** **** ****:

** **** ******** ** say ********* ** *** it ******** ** ** competent? ** *** *****, what **** **** ****?

Isabella Cheng

IPVMU Certified | In reply to Undisclosed Integrator #4 | 02/16/21 02:12pm

**** ** ******** ** read "*********". *'** ******* **** sentence ***********. ****** *** the *****, ***!

Undisclosed #5

02/16/21 11:08pm

***** ** *** **** of *** *** ***** seemingly ******** **** ** auditing *********, * ***** imagine ***** *** ** be **** **** **** this *** ****.

*** * ** ******** that *** ******** ******* databases *** **** ***** accounts ******** ** **** probably**** ********* **** **** ****** with **** ******* - and *** **** **** how **** **** *****.

** *** ***** ** true *** *** ***** of ******, **** ***** they ******** ** **** that ****?

***** ** ** *** that **** **** **** publicly ****** ***** *****.... so ** **** ******* discharge *** ****** **** find *** *** **** kind ** ****** ******** to *** **** *** promise *** ** ********* to **** **** *****?

Undisclosed Integrator #3

In reply to Undisclosed #5 | 02/18/21 04:50pm

***** ** ** *** that **** **** **** publicly ****** ***** *****.... so ** **** ******* discharge *** ****** **** find *** *** **** kind ** ****** ******** to *** **** *** promise *** ** ********* to **** **** *****?

**** *****'* * *********. If **** **** ** any ***** ********* **** have ********* ******* ****, that *********** ** ************. This ***** ** ** my ***** ********* *******.

** ********* ******* ******** is ** ****** ********* ignorant. ***** ********* *** be ******* ******** ** third-parties **** ** *** customers *** *** ******** holders, **** ** * poor ******** ** ****.

**, ******** **** *** knows **** ***** **** other ********* ** **** behavior, **** **** **** over **% ** *** cases **** ******* ******* judgement, **** ** ******* or ********* ****** *****.

Undisclosed #5

In reply to Undisclosed Integrator #3 | 02/18/21 06:49pm

**** ***** ** ** my ***** ********* *******.

*** - **** ** exactly **** * *** thinking... ******* ***, * can't *** *** **** could ****************.

*** ***** **** ***** any **** ** ******* strategy ** **** ***'* know?

Undisclosed End User #6

02/17/21 04:13am

(*********** *** **** *******)

'* ******** *** * security ********** ******* **** is ****** ******** ** a ******** *** "******* at ***." '

*** *** ******* ****** out ** ** *****-******* attention **** ***** *** have ******** ** *** absence ** *** ********. Who ***** ***** *** those ****** ***** **, today? "******* ** ***," indeed!

John Honovich

IPVM | 02/18/21 07:42am

*** ************ ************ ** **** ******* *** ****** ** ADT's ****** ** *******:

*** *********** **** *** motion ** *******, ********** on **** * *** issues ***** *** ********* went *** ** * limb. ********* *** ****** causes ** ****** ** pursue *** ** **** be *********** ** *** how **** ***** ***. No *********** ** **** one.

Undisclosed Integrator #3

02/18/21 05:05pm

***** ** *** ***********'* comments ** ******** ****, the **** ****** **** can ** ******* ** the ********** ** ****** of ******** *** ********* hiring/supervision. ****, ***** ** ADT's ********** ** ********* clauses ** ***** ********, which **** **** ** in *** ******** ** cases ** ***** ********** brought ********* ******.

*** **** **** *** quotes **** *** *****'* comments ** *** ******* judgement ****** ** ****, the ******** *********** ******* an ********* **** *** security ********** ******** ***** be ****** **** ********* by ***'* *********. ***** the ***** ****** **** the ********* ****** **** "A ******** *** * security ********** ******* **** is ****** ******** ** a ******** *** "******* at ***," **** ** a ****** *** *** jury (** ***** ** a ***** *****). ****, the ********* *** ******** to ****** ** **** conclusion. ********* *******

- *** ****** ****** isn't * "******** ******" in *** **** ****** as ** ***** ******.

- *** ******** ** the ****** ** ***** of ********* ******** **** was ********* ** ****** to ** *** ******** and **** *** ******** did *** ******* *** assurances ******* ***** ********...*** it ****** *** ******** disclaimers ** **** ******.

- *** *********** ****** the ******** ***** ** defeated ** ******** ***********.

** ******** ** **** seems, ***** ***'* **** success ** *** ********* decision *** ***** *** substantial ******** ** *** Plaintiff. ***, ***** *** reasons **** *** *** seek ** ****** *** matter ****** ********* ** complete. ** **** **** civil *******, **** **** likely ** ******** ****** trial.

John Honovich

IPVM | In reply to Undisclosed Integrator #3 | 02/18/21 05:11pm

*** ******** *** *** provide *** ********** ******* cyber ********

* ** *** **** if *** **** *** this ******** *** ** they ***, * ***'* speculate ** *** * court ***** ****.

*******, ***** **** *** charges * ******* *** its *******, *** * great ****** ******** ** ADT's ******** ** **** ADT **** "*** ******* any ********** ******* ***** security".

Undisclosed #5

In reply to John Honovich | 02/21/21 11:08pm

*** * ***** ****** position ** ***'* ******** is **** *** **** "not ******* *** ********** against ***** ********".

**** *** ******* ** an ********* ********* ***** X ********* * ****** ******** that **** ******* ** defense ******* ***** *?

** ***** * ** an ************ *** ***-****** thing, **** ** *** appropriate ******** ** **** on *** **** ******* defends ******* ***** *?

*** ****** *** ******** claims ***** *** **** product ******* ***** * might ** **** ** the **** ********, **?

Read this IPVM report for free.

This article is part of IPVM's 6,805 reports, 913 tests and is only available to members. To get a one-time preview of our work, enter your work email to access the full article.

Already a member? Login here | Join now
Loading Related Reports