IRAC 2 Note: To answer this question, in addition to relevant federal laws, you will want to review the California Consumer Privacy Act and include within your answer the SPECIFIC SECTIONS of the CCPA that Plaintiff alleges were violated. (E.g. Section 1798.120(b) for sharing information with a third party without notifying or giving consumers the right to opt out.) Van Swilder has filed a lawsuit against the creators of DormParty, a social group sharing app, alleging that DormParty shares information with Facebook and other third parties in exchange for money in violation of California state and federal privacy laws. DormParty is marketed mostly to college students and offers a virtual "Dorm" where multiple parties can video chat with one another in different rooms. Plaintiff Van of Northridge, CA, says he downloaded the app and was harmed when the company disclosed his personal identifiable information to third-parties, including Facebook, without his consent. The company's privacy policy discloses that it does collect certain categories of user data, but not that it shares that data with third-parties. The policy claims the app is "secure" and that there has been "no exposure of customer date or third-party accounts." 4 When users download and open the app, they are immediately prompted to connect it to their Facebook account. This enables Facebook's software development kit to collect personally identifiable information, such as the IP address, the phone service carrier and the specific device being used. In addition, each user device generates a unique advertiser identifier known as an IDFA, which allows third-parties to learn information such as location, behaviors and preferences. This, in turn, allows those parties to tailor their advertising accordingly. According to Van, "with the IDFA, marketers do not need to know the name, address, or email of a particular user in order to identify, target, and contract that particular user." That's why this information has "tremendous economic value" to those parties. Van agrues that this activity is undetectable by DormParty users and the company fails to warn them of it. Van also says he never had a chance to opt out. Van argues that DormParty's set-up effectively bars users from opting out of sharing their information. Van reports his concerns to the FTC and also decides to sue in California State Court four violation of the California Consumer Privacy Act. 1. YOU ARE THE JUDGE IN VAN'S CALIFORNIA LAWSUIT AGAINST DORMPARTY. WHO WINS AND WHY? (Answer in IRAC format, and be sure to include the arguments you think the other side would make.) 2. YOU ARE AN ATTORNEY FOR THE FTC. HAS DORMPARTY VIOLATED ANY FTC LAWS RELATED CONSUMER PRIVACY? (Answer in IRAC format, and be sure to include the arguments you think the other side would make.)