1

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

BLEICHMAR FONTI & AULD LLP

Lesley E. Weaver (SBN 191305) 

555 12th Street, Suite 1600 

Oakland, CA 94607 

Tel.: (415) 445-4003 

Fax: (415) 445-4020 

lweaver@bfalaw.com

DICELLO LEVITT GUTZLER LLC

Amy E. Keller, pro hac vice to be filed 

Ten North Dearborn Street 

Sixth Floor 

Chicago, IL 60602 

Tel.: (312) 214-7900 

akeller@dicellolevitt.com

Counsel for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Class 

[Additional Counsel Listed on Signature Page] 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

R.S. and J.S., through their guardian, 

individually, and on behalf of all others 

similarly situated,

Plaintiff, 

v.

TikTok Inc., a corporation, and ByteDance, 

Inc., a corporation, 

Defendants. 

Case No.:

CLASS ACTION

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

3:20-cv-3212

Case: 1:20-cv-04728 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/11/20 Page 1 of 18 PageID #:1
1

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Plaintiffs R.S. and J.S., both minor children, by and through their guardian (“Plaintiffs”), 

individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, bring this class action against TikTok 

Inc. (“TikTok”), the successor-in-interest to Musical.ly, Inc., and ByteDance, Inc. 

(“ByteDance”) (collectively, “Defendants”), and allege as follows based on investigation of 

counsel and information and belief: 

I. NATURE OF THE CASE

1. Defendant TikTok maintains and operates a popular social media application 

(“TikTok App”) that allows users to view, share, upload, and create short videos. When a user 

creates a video through the App, TikTok offers several face filters and stickers that allow a user

to impose graphic features onto the user’s face or graphically alter the user’s facial features. 

TikTok encourages users to use these effects by listing them under titles such as “Beauty,” 

“Trending,” and “Funny.” TikTok also offers a face tracker lens effect that detects and zooms 

in on a user’s face. 

2. Unknown and undisclosed to the user, when the user accesses the face stickers, 

filters and tracker lens, Defendants collect, store and use the user’s facial geometry. Indeed, 

Defendants collect this information before the user even elects to save or share the video.

Defendants do not disclose for what purposes this data is being collected for, who has access, or 

how long this data will be retained.

3. Defendants’ collection of user’s facial geometry violates the Illinois Biometric 

Information Privacy Act 740 ILCS 14/1 et seq. (“BIPA”), which requires informed consent prior 

to the collection of biographic information. Defendants’ failure to publicly disclose their written 

policy regarding the retention of this biometric information also separately violates BIPA. 

4. This action seeks an order (i) enjoining Defendants’ from further unauthorized 

collection, storage, and use of Plaintiffs’ biometric information; (ii) declaring that Defendants’ 

conduct violates the BIPA; (iii) awarding statutory damages to Plaintiffs and Class Members; 

and (iv) requiring Defendants to clearly and conspicuously disclose its written policy that sets 

forth its retention and use of Plaintiffs’ and Class Members’ biometric information.

Case: 1:20-cv-04728 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/11/20 Page 2 of 18 PageID #:2
2

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

II. PARTIES

A. Plaintiffs

5. Plaintiff R.S., a minor, is a citizen and resident of Illinois. Plaintiff created her 

TikTok account in or around early 2020 and maintains her account to the present day. 

6. Plaintiff J.S., a minor, is a citizen and resident of Illinois. Plaintiff created his 

TikTok account in or around early 2020 and maintains his account to the present day.

7. Plaintiffs have used the TikTok App regularly since creating an account and have 

uploaded and posted videos to the App that include images of their faces. Plaintiffs have also 

used the face stickers, filters, and tracker lens available in the App when creating, saving, and 

posting videos on the App. Plaintiffs did not know or expect that Defendants collect, store, and 

use their biometric identifier and biometric information when they used the App. If Plaintiffs

had known, Plaintiffs would not have would not have used the App or would have limited their

use of the App. 

8. Neither Plaintiff, nor their legally-authorized guardian, ever received notice from 

Defendants (written or otherwise) that Defendants would collect, store, and/or use their 

biometric identifiers or biometric information. Neither Plaintiff, nor their legally-authorized 

guardian, ever received notice from Defendants of the specific purpose and length of time that 

Defendants’ would collect, store, and/or use Plaintiffs’ biometric identifiers or biometric 

information. Neither Plaintiff, nor their legally-authorized guardian, gave authorization (written 

or otherwise) for Defendants to collect, store, and/or use Plaintiffs’ biometric identifiers or

biometric information.

9. Neither Plaintiff, nor their legally-authorized guardian, are aware of, nor do they 

recall seeing, a retention schedule setting out the guidelines for Defendants to permanently 

destroy biometric identifiers or biometric information. 

10. Neither Plaintiffs, nor their legally-authorized guardian, recall seeing the Terms 

of Service, Privacy Policy, or Privacy Policy for Younger Users upon registering for an account

Case: 1:20-cv-04728 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/11/20 Page 3 of 18 PageID #:3
3

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

with the App. Plaintiff does not recall receiving any notification from Defendants regarding 

changes to these policies.

B. Defendants

11. Defendant TikTok, Inc. is a California corporation with its headquarters in 

Culver City, California. Defendant TikTok maintains an office in Mountain View, California. 

Defendant TikTok is the surviving successor-in-interest to Musical.ly, Inc. (“Musical.ly”). 

Musical.ly launched the Musical.ly Application (“Muscial.ly App”) in 2014. In 2018, the 

Musical.ly App was rebranded to TikTok. 

12. Defendant ByteDance, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its headquarters in 

Palo Alto, California. ByteDance Ltd., a Beijing-based company founded in 2012, is the parent 

corporation of ByteDance, Inc.

III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

13. This Court has jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act, 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1332, because (i) this is a proposed class action in which there are at least 100 Class members,

(ii) the parties are minimally diverse, as Plaintiffs and Defendants are domiciled in different 

states, and (iii) the combined claims of Class members exceed $5,000,000, exclusive of interest, 

attorneys’ fees, and costs.

14. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants because both Defendants 

regularly conduct business throughout California, their principal places of business are in 

California, and Defendant TikTok is incorporated in California.

15. Venue is proper in this District because a substantial part of the events or 

omissions giving rise to Plaintiffs’ claims occurred here, and Defendants caused harm to Class 

members residing within this judicial District.

Case: 1:20-cv-04728 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/11/20 Page 4 of 18 PageID #:4
4

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IV. COMMON FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

A. Overview of the TikTok App and Its Predecessor Musical.ly.

16. Musical.ly, Inc. and Musical.ly, a Cayman Island corporation, first created a 

social media video platform through a software application in 2014 (the “Musical.ly App”). Like 

the current version of the TikTok App, the Musical.ly App allowed users to create and edit short 

videos. The app also provided a library of music that the user could apply as background music 

to their video, in effect allowing the user to create their very own music video. The Musical.ly 

App included several features that scanned the user’s facial geometry. These features included 

face stickers and face filters, which would alter the image of the user’s face. 

17. While the Musical.ly App was growing in popularity in the U.S., ByteDance Ltd., 

the parent corporation to Defendant ByteDance, Inc., created the TikTok App in 2016. The App 

mirrored the purpose and features of the Musical.ly App, allowing users to create and upload 

videos.

18. In 2017, ByteDance, Inc., acquired Musical.ly, for $1 billion, and rebranded 

Musical.ly to TikTok, Inc. 

19. On August 2, 2018, TikTok merged the Musical.ly and TikTok Apps. Following 

its merger, the TikTok App has continued expanding its user base. As of November 2019, the 

TikTok App has over 26.5 million U.S. users and was the most downloaded application on the 

Apple app store.

1

20. The App is predominately used by young adults and minors. Indeed, at least twothirds of U.S. users are teenagers or in their twenties.2

 1 Ansoor Iqbal, TikTok Revenue and Usage Statistics (2020), Business of Apps (Apr. 24, 

2020), https://www.businessofapps.com/data/tik-tok-statistics/.

2 Greg Roumeliotis, et al., Exclusive: U.S. opens national security investigation into TikTok –

sources, Reuters (Nov. 1, 2019), https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tiktok-cfiusexclusive/exclusive-u-s-opens-national-security-investigation-into-tiktok-sourcesidUSKBN1XB4IL.

Case: 1:20-cv-04728 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/11/20 Page 5 of 18 PageID #:5
5

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

21. TikTok’s popularity with younger users is by design. The TikTok algorithmic 

feed launches a never-ending-stream of videos at a user.3 The algorithm is constantly learning 

what content to deliver to its users to keep them engaged. A user receives videos based on those

the user has already watched and interreacted with.

4 Users are encouraged to engage with other 

videos by responding in turn. 

22. TikTok’s algorithms allow the App to mine extensive data regarding how its 

users react to videos—which, in turn, allows Defendants to understand how people think, feel, 

and act, “making [TikTok] an expert on what makes people tick and how to persuade them to 

watch, share [,] or like certain content.”5

23. Users do not understand the type of information the TikTok App gathers on them 

and, if they did know, would likely not download the App, use it less, or not record videos with 

their images in them. 

24. Given the nature of the App, and the extensive information it gathers on 

individuals, and predictions concerning individuals’ actions the App can make, U.S lawmakers 

have labeled TikTok to be a “potential counterintelligence threat we cannot ignore.”6

B. TikTok’sImproper Collection, Storage, and Use of Users’ Biometric Identifiers and 

Biometric Information 

25. When a user creates a video on the TikTok App, the user can choose to apply 

effects that will apply a graphic animation onto the face of the user or that will alter the facial 

features of the user. TikTok categorizes these effects in groups labeled “Beauty,” “Trending,” 

 3 John Herrman, TikTok Is Rewriting the World, N.Y. Times (Mar. 10, 2019), 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/10/style/what-is-tik-tok.html. 4 Morgan Sung, A Guide to using TikTok’s algorithm to watch videos you actually like, 

Mashable (Jan. 13, 2020), https://mashable.com/article/tiktok-algorithm-watch-what-youactually-like/.

5 Shelly Banjo, Take China’s TikTok App Security Threat Seriously, Bloomberg (Oct. 29, 

2019), https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2019-10-29/worries-that-tiktok-is-athreat-to-national-security-have-merit.

6 Id.

Case: 1:20-cv-04728 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/11/20 Page 6 of 18 PageID #:6
6

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

“Funny,” to encourage users to access them. Users also have the option to use a face tracking 

lens, that will detect and automatically zoom in on a user’s face. 

26. The Musical.ly App operated similar to the current version of the TikTok App, 

and also scanned, collected, and stored a user’s facial geometry when that user applied a facial 

graphic feature, such as a sticker or facial filter.

27. Unbeknownst to the user, when a user engages in these features, TikTok collects, 

stores and maintains a copy of the user’s facial geometry as well as biometric information 

derived from this copy. TikTok does not disclose to users that this information is being collected

and stored, and it does not disclose how it is maintained. 

28. Upon information and belief, TikTok transfers copies of the users’ facial 

geometry and derivative information to other corporate entities including Defendant ByteDance, 

Inc.

29. Additionally, web analysts have discovered that TikTok appears to be harvesting 

biometric data in order to create a search function—allowing users to search TikTok videos 

based upon the individuals who appear in them.7

C. Defendants Are Violating the Biometric Information Privacy Act

30. The BIPA was enacted in 2008, to regulate the collection and use of biometrics. 

The statute recognizes that biometrics “unlike other unique identifiers” cannot be changed when 

compromised.”8

31. Under the BIPA, biometric identifiers means “retina or iris scan, fingerprint, 

voiceprint, or scan of hand or face geometry” and biometric information means “any 

information, regardless of how it is captured, converted, stored, or shared, based on an 

individual's biometric identifier used to identify an individual.”9

 7 Shubham Agarwal, TikTok’s creepy new feature lets you search for videos based on people’s 

faces, Digital Trends (Sept. 25, 2019), https://www.digitaltrends.com/social-media/tiktokfacial-recognition-video-face-search-feature-china/.

8 740 ILCS 14/5(c).

9 Id.

Case: 1:20-cv-04728 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/11/20 Page 7 of 18 PageID #:7
7

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

32. At issue in this instant action, are scans of a user’s facial geometry and 

information derived from that scan, that meet the clear definition of biometric identifiers or 

biometric information. 

33. The statute further provides that:

10

(b) No private entity may collect, capture, purchase, receive through trade, 

or otherwise obtain a person’s or a customer’s biometric identifier or 

biometric information unless it first: 

(1) informs the subject or the subject’s legally authorized 

representative in writing that a biometric identifier or biometric 

information is being collected or stored; 

(2) informs the subject or the subject’s legally authorized 

representative in writing of the specific purpose and length of term 

for which a biometric identifier or biometric information is being 

collected, stored, and used; and 

(3) receives a written release executed by the subject of the 

biometric identifier or biometric information or the subject’s legally 

authorized representative. . . .

34. In violation of the BIPA, TikTok does not disclose to its users that when they use 

the facial effects, TikTok scans, collects, and stores their facial geometry. TikTok also does not 

provide any information about the specific purpose and length for which it will retain biometric 

information.

35. Further, TikTok does not provide a written schedule outlining its schedule and 

guidelines for destroying the biometric data as required under BIPA. Under the statute:

11

(a) private entity in possession of biometric identifiers or biometric 

information must develop a written retention schedule and guidelines for 

permanently destroying biometric identifiers and biometric information 

when the initial purpose for collecting or obtaining such identifiers or 

information has been satisfied or within 3 years of the individual's last 

interaction with the private entity, whichever occurs first.

36. This retention schedule is not included in TikTok’s terms of service and is not 

otherwise publicly available for users to access.

 10 740 ILCS 14/15.

11 740 ILCA 14/15(a).

Case: 1:20-cv-04728 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/11/20 Page 8 of 18 PageID #:8
8

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

37. TikTok’s “Privacy Policy for Younger Users” also fails to adequately disclose 

the collection, retention, and use of facial identifying information.12 At no point during the sign 

up process are users even referred to this other privacy policy.

38. TikTok makes no effort to ensure that its users understand how their biometric 

information is used or stored prior to use of the App.

E. Defendants Have An Established Record of Not Respecting Users’ Privacy

39. Defendants have repeatedly disregarded users’ privacy by collecting, sharing and 

using users’ information without obtaining consent.

40. In 2019, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) filed a complaint against 

TikTok over allegations that it violated the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act 

(“COPPA”). 15 U.S.C. §§ 6501, et seq. Defendant TikTok settled the claim for $5.7 million—

at that time, the largest penalty ever imposed for violations of COPPA.13

41. In November 2019, the United States government announced a national security 

review of TikTok’s parent, ByteDance Ltd.’s acquisition of the Musical.ly app for $1 billion.14

TikTok has been banned by use for the United States Armed Forces, Department of Homeland 

Security, and the Transportation Security Administration.15 National legislation is currently 

being proposed that would ban all federal employees from using the App.16

 12 Privacy policy for Younger Users, TikTok (Jan. 2020) 

https://www.tiktok.com/legal/privacy-policy-for-younger-users?lang=en. 13 Lesley Fair, Largest FTC COPPA settlement requires Musical.ly to change its tune, FTC 

(Feb. 27, 2019), https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/blogs/business-blog/2019/02/largest-ftccoppa-settlement-requires-musically-change-its. 14 Jack Nicas, Mike Isaac, and Ana Swanson, TikTok Said to Be Under National Security 

Review, N.Y. Times (Nov. 1, 2019), https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/01/technology/tiktoknational-security-review.html.

15 Mary Meisenzahl, US government agencies are banning TikTok, the social media app teens 

are obsessed with, over cybersecurity fears –here’s the full list, Business Insider (Feb. 25, 

2020), https://www.businessinsider.com/us-government-agencies-have-banned-tiktok-app2020-2#7-this-week-tsa-became-the-latest-agency-to-specifically-ban-the-app-7.

16 Alexandra S. Levine, Senate bill would ban TikTok on federal employees’ work phones, 

Politico (Mar. 12, 2020), https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/12/senate-bill-would-bantiktok-on-federal-employees-work-phones-126727.

Case: 1:20-cv-04728 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/11/20 Page 9 of 18 PageID #:9
9

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

42. Just recently, the Dutch privacy watchdog has announced that it will conduct an 

investigation of the TikTok App to determine whether the information provided to children 

“adequately explains how their personal data is collected, processed and used.”17

43. Investigations and bans by regulators exemplify the extreme disregard 

Defendants have shown for the privacy and security of its users.

V. CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS

44. Plaintiffs bring this class action on behalf of themselves and other similarly 

situated individuals. Pursuant to Rules 23(a), (b)(1), (b)(2) and (b)(3) of the Federal Rules of 

Civil Procedure, Plaintiffs seek to certify a class (the “Nationwide Class”) of:

Any user of the Musical.ly or TikTok Apps, who while residing in 

Illinois, used face filters, face stickers, or the face tracker lens on an 

image or video of that user’s face or whose face appeared in a video 

uploaded to the Musical.ly or TikTok Apps while the user resided 

in Illinois. 

45. Excluded from the Class are Defendants, any entity in which any Defendant has 

a controlling interest, and its legal representatives, officers, directors, employees, assigns and 

successors. Also excluded from the Class is any judge, justice or judicial officer presiding over 

this matter and the members of their immediate families and judicial staff.

46. Numerosity and Ascertainability. The number of members in the Class is so 

numerous that joinder is impracticable. Class members can be ascertained by the objective 

criteria such as use and geographic information and the precise number of Class members can 

be determined through discovery, including discovery of Defendants’ business records. At a 

minimum, the Class is made up of thousands of members.

47. Common Questions of Law and Fact Predominate. There are questions of law 

and fact common to Plaintiffs and Class members, and those questions predominate over any 

 17 Stephani Bodoni, TikTok Faces Dutch Privacy Probe Over Children’s Data, Bloomberg 

Quint (May 8, 2020), https://www.bloombergquint.com/onweb/tiktok-faces-dutch-privacyprobe-over-safety-of-children-s-data.

Case: 1:20-cv-04728 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/11/20 Page 10 of 18 PageID #:10
10

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

questions that may affect any individual Class member. Such common questions of law and fact 

include, but are not limited to: 

a. Whether Defendants collected, stored, or otherwise used Plaintiffs and Class 

Members biometric identifiers or biometric information;

b. Whether Defendants informed Plaintiffs and Class Members of their collection, 

storage, and/or use of the biometric identifiers or biometric information;

c. Whether Defendants informed Plaintiffs and Class Members of the specific 

purpose and length of term for which their biometric identifier or biometric 

information would be collected, stored, and/or used;

d. Whether Defendants obtained written release (as defined in 740 ILCS 14/10) 

from Plaintiffs and Class Members to collect, store, and/or use their biometric 

identifiers or biometric information;

e. Whether Defendants made available to the public, Plaintiffs and Class Members, 

a written policy establishing a retention schedule and guidelines for permanently 

destroying biometric identifier and biometric information;

f. Whether Defendants acted intentionally, recklessly, or negligently in violating 

the BIPA;

g. Whether Plaintiffs and Class Members are entitled to statutory damages under 

the BIPA;

Whether Plaintiffs and Class Members are entitled to declaratory and injunctive relief

48. Typicality. Plaintiffs’ claims are typical of the claims of all members of the Class.

Their claims arise from the same practices and conduct that give rise to the claims of all Class 

members and are based on the same legal theories. Plaintiffs, like all Class members, has had 

their biometric identifiers or biometric information collected, stored, and/or used by Defendants’ 

without their knowledge and without their informed consent. 

49. Adequacy. Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Class. 

They have no interests antagonistic to those of the other Class members and are committed to 

Case: 1:20-cv-04728 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/11/20 Page 11 of 18 PageID #:11
11

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

vigorously prosecuting this case. Plaintiffs have retained counsel experienced in consumer class 

actions and complex litigation involving defective automobiles.

50. Superiority. A class action is superior to other available methods for the fair and 

efficient adjudication of this controversy. Given that the relative amount of each Class member’s 

is small relative to the expense of litigating those claims, and given Defendants’ financial 

resources, no Class member is likely to seek legal redress on an individual basis for the violations 

alleged in this complaint. Individual actions would significantly increase the expense to all 

parties, burden the court with duplicative litigation, and create a risk of inconsistent or varying 

adjudications that would establish incompatible standards of conduct for Defendants. Separate 

actions by individual Class members would also risk adjudications that would, as a practical 

matter, be dispositive of the interests of the other members not party to the individual 

adjudications or would substantially impair or impede their ability to protect their interests. A 

class action, however, promotes an orderly and expeditious adjudication of the Class claims, 

presents fewer management difficulties, and ensures comprehensive supervision in a single

forum.

51. Defendants acted and refused to act on grounds generally applicable to the Class, 

thereby making appropriate final injunctive relief with respect to the members of the Class as a 

whole.

52. All members of the Class are ascertainable by reference to objective criteria. 

Defendants have, or have access to, address information for Class members which may be used 

for the purpose of providing notice of the pendency of this class action.

VI. CAUSES OF ACTION

COUNT I

VIOLATION OF 740 ILCS 14/1, et seq.

Failure to Obtain Informed, Written Consent

(On Behalf of Plaintiffs and the Class)

53. Plaintiffs incorporate the foregoing allegations as if fully set forth herein.

Case: 1:20-cv-04728 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/11/20 Page 12 of 18 PageID #:12
12

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

54. The BIPA makes it unlawful for any private entity to “collect, capture, purchase, 

receive through trade, or otherwise obtain a person’s or a customer’s biometric identifier or 

biometric information unless it first: (1) informs the subject or the subject’s legally authorized 

representative in writing that a biometric identifier or biometric information is being collected 

or stored; (2) informs the subject or the subject’s legally authorized representative in writing of 

the specific purpose and length of term for which a biometric identifier or biometric information 

is being collected, stored, and used; and (3) receives a written release executed by the subject of 

the biometric identifier or biometric information or the subject’s legally authorized 

representative.”

55. Plaintiffs and class members had their biometric identifiers or biometric

information captured, collected, stored, and used by Defendants through the TikTok App.

56. TikTok is a California corporation and thus, qualifies as a “private entity” under 

the BIPA. 740 ILCS 14/10. ByteDance, Inc. is a Delaware corporation, with its principal place 

of business in California and thus, also qualifies as “private entity” under the BIPA. Id.

57. Defendant did not inform Plaintiffs and Class Members in writing that their 

biometric identifiers or biometric information would be “collected and stored” as required under 

740 ILCS 14/15(b)(1). 

58. Defendants practice of collecting, storing and using Plaintiffs’ and Class 

Members’ biometric identifiers or biometric information violated Plaintiffs’ and Class 

Members’ right to privacy in their biometric identifiers or biometric information under the 

BIPA, 740 ILC 14/1, et seq.

59. Defendants acted intentionally or recklessly in collecting, storing and using 

Plaintiffs’ and Class Members’ biometric identifiers or biometric information. As set forth 

herein, Defendants’ designed the TikTok application to capture and collect biometric 

information of a user before the user even posts the video. In the alternative, Defendants acted 

negligently when it collected, stored, and used Plaintiffs’ and Class Members’ biometric 

identifiers or biometric information without obtaining written consent.

Case: 1:20-cv-04728 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/11/20 Page 13 of 18 PageID #:13
13

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

60. TikTok purposefully avoided providing notices or obtaining consent from Class 

members in order to ensure that as many users downloaded and used the App as possible.

61. As a result of Defendants’ intentional and/or reckless violation of BIPA, the 

Plaintiffs and Class members already have been injured and will continue to be injured, in an 

amount to be proven at trial.

62. On behalf of themselves and Class Members, Plaintiffs seek: (1) injunctive and 

equitable relief as is necessary to protect the interests of Plaintiffs and Class Members by 

requiring TikTok to comply with the 740 ILCS 14/15(b) requirements for the collection, storage, 

and use of biometric identifiers or biometric information and (2) statutory damages of $5,000 

per intentional or reckless violation of BIPA pursuant to 740 ILCS 14/20(2) and statutory 

damages of $1,000 per negligent violation of the BIPA pursuant to 740 ILCS 14/20(1); and (3) 

reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs and other litigation expenses pursuant to 740 ILCS 14/20(3).

COUNT II

VIOLATION OF 740 ILCS 14/1, et seq.

Failure to Institute and Maintain Publicly-Available Retention Schedule

(On Behalf of Plaintiffs and the Class)

63. Plaintiffs incorporate the foregoing allegations as if fully set forth herein.

64. The BIPA makes it unlawful for any private entity to “collect, capture, purchase, 

receive through trade, or otherwise obtain a person’s or a customer’s biometric identifier or 

biometric information unless it first: (1) informs the subject or the subject’s legally authorized 

representative in writing that a biometric identifier or biometric information is being collected 

or stored; (2) informs the subject or the subject’s legally authorized representative in writing of 

the specific purpose and length of term for which a biometric identifier or biometric information 

is being collected, stored, and used; and (3) receives a written release executed by the subject of 

the biometric identifier or biometric information or the subject’s legally authorized 

representative.”

65. Plaintiffs and class members had their biometric identifiers or biometric 

information captured, collected, stored, and used by Defendants through the TikTok App. 

Case: 1:20-cv-04728 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/11/20 Page 14 of 18 PageID #:14
14

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

66. TikTok is a California corporation and thus, qualifies as a “private entity” under 

the BIPA. 740 ILCS 14/10. ByteDance, Inc. is a Delaware corporation, with its principal place 

of business in California and thus, also qualifies as “private entity” under the BIPA. Id.

67. Defendant did not inform Plaintiffs and Class Members in writing that their 

biometric identifiers or biometric information would be “collected and stored” as required under 

740 ILCS 14/15(b)(1)

68. Nor did Defendants inform Plaintiffs and Class Members in writing of the 

“specific purpose and length of term for which [their] biometric identifier or biometric 

information is being collected, stored, and used” as required under 740 ILCS 14/15(b)(2).

69. Defendant also failed to make available to the public, a written policy 

“establishing a retention schedule and guidelines for permanently destroying biometric 

identifiers or biometric information” as required under 740 ILCS 14/15(a).

70. Defendants acted intentionally or recklessly in collecting, storing and using 

Plaintiffs’ and Class Members’ biometric identifiers or biometric information and in not making 

publicly available a data retention policy. As set forth herein, Defendants’ designed the TikTok 

application to capture and collect biometric information of a user before the user even posts the 

video. In the alternative, Defendants acted negligently when it collected, stored, and used 

Plaintiffs’ and Class Members’ biometric identifiers or biometric information without making 

publicly available a data retention policy.

71. On behalf of themselves and Class Members, Plaintiffs seek: (1) injunctive and 

equitable relief as is necessary to protect the interests of Plaintiffs and Class Members by 

requiring TikTok to make publicly available a policy for the permanent destruction of biometric 

identifiers or biometric information pursuant to 740 ILCS 14/15(a); (2) statutory damages of 

$5,000 per intentional or reckless violation of BIPA pursuant to 740 ILCS 14/20(2) and statutory 

damages of $1,000 per negligent violation of the BIPA pursuant to 740 ILCS 14/20(1); and (3) 

reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs and other litigation expenses pursuant to 740 ILCS 14/20(3).

Case: 1:20-cv-04728 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/11/20 Page 15 of 18 PageID #:15
15

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, and each Class member, pray for judgment against 

Defendants as follows:

A. That this action and the proposed class be certified and maintained as a class 

action, appointing Plaintiffs as representatives of the Class, and appointing the attorneys and law 

firms representing Plaintiffs as counsel for the Class;

B. Enter Judgment against Defendants on Plaintiffs’ and Class Members’ asserted 

causes of action;

C. For statutory damages of $5,000 for each intentional or reckless violation of the 

BIPA, or in the alternative, for statutory damages of $1,000 for each negligent violation of the 

BIPA;

D. For equitable, injunctive, and declaratory relief as may be appropriate;

E. For attorneys’ fees and costs as permitted by law;

F. For pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, as prescribed by law; and

G. For such additional legal and equitable relief as this Court may deem just and 

proper.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 38(b), Plaintiffs demand a trial by jury on 

all causes of action so triable.

Dated: May 11, 2020 BLEICHMAR FONTI & AULD LLP

By: /s/ Lesley E. Weaver

Lesley E. Weaver (SBN 191305)

555 12th Street, Suite 1600

Oakland, CA 94607

Telephone: (415) 445-4003

Facsimile: (415) 445-4020

lweaver@bfalaw.com

Case: 1:20-cv-04728 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/11/20 Page 16 of 18 PageID #:16
16

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

DICELLO LEVITT GUTZLER LLC

Amy E. Keller, pro hac vice to be filed

Ten North Dearborn Street

Sixth Floor

Chicago, IL 60602

Telephone: (312) 214-7900

akeller@dicellolevitt.com 

Counsel for Plaintiffs and the Putative Class

Case: 1:20-cv-04728 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/11/20 Page 17 of 18 PageID #:17
17

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

DECLARATION OF LESLEY E. WEAVER FOR CLRA COUNT

I, Lesley E. Weaver, declare and state as follows:

1. I am over the age of 18 years and counsel for Plaintiffs in this action. I submit 

this affidavit as required by California Civil Code § 1780(d).

2. Venue is proper in this judicial District because Defendants are doing business

in the counties comprising the Northern District of California.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing 

is true and correct.

Executed this 11th day of May 2020 in San Francisco, California.

 /s/ Lesley E. Weaver 

 Lesley E. Weaver

Case: 1:20-cv-04728 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/11/20 Page 18 of 18 PageID #:18