## Facts

- Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC provided residential telephone service via the Internet (VoIP).
- Comcast offered subscribers the option to pay a monthly fee to keep a telephone number “unlisted” and private.
- Comcast transmitted and sold directory listing information for other subscribers’ numbers to a third-party listing service that published an online directory.
- An internal Comcast error caused Comcast to transmit all of its phone numbers to the listing service, including approximately 75,000 numbers that subscribers had paid to keep unlisted.
- The unlisted numbers were made publicly available through the third-party online directory during the period of the error.
- Comcast received complaints about unlisted numbers appearing publicly for roughly one and a half years before it identified the cause of the problem.
- After determining what occurred, Comcast arranged to have the unlisted numbers removed from the online directory.
- Comcast offered to refund the monthly unlisted-number fees to affected customers.
- Approximately 200 affected subscribers reported that they needed their numbers kept private for safety reasons.
- The California Attorney General sued Comcast, alleging violations of California’s false-advertising law, unfair-competition law, and public-utilities laws.
- The parties reached a proposed settlement requiring payments to affected subscribers, civil penalties payable to the State, and a continuing injunction governing Comcast’s handling of directory listing information.

## Issues

1. Whether the court should enter a stipulated final judgment and permanent injunction resolving the State’s claims that Comcast unlawfully disclosed paid unlisted subscriber numbers in violation of false-advertising, unfair-competition, and public-utilities laws.
2. What monetary relief and prospective injunctive terms were appropriate to address the disclosure, compensate affected subscribers, and reduce the risk of future disclosures.

## Decision

- The Superior Court entered a stipulated Final Judgment and Permanent Injunction resolving the enforcement action.
- Comcast agreed to provide monetary relief that included:
  - $100 payments to each affected subscriber, totaling approximately $7.5 million.
  - Additional payments totaling approximately $432,000 for subscribers who reported safety-related concerns tied to the disclosure.
  - $25 million payable to the State as penalties.
- The judgment imposed ongoing injunctive obligations requiring Comcast to take specified measures concerning directory listing information, including continued remediation of the disclosure, controls on permitted listing information and third-party use, improved complaint handling, and steps intended to prevent future disclosures of private subscriber data.
- Comcast did not admit liability as part of the stipulated judgment.

## Legal Principles

- A provider that charges consumers for a privacy feature but discloses the protected information may face enforcement under California’s false-advertising and unfair-competition statutes, as well as public-utilities confidentiality obligations where applicable.
- California enforcement actions may seek both consumer restitution-type payments and civil penalties for conduct affecting large numbers of subscribers.
- A consent judgment can impose forward-looking operational requirements—such as vendor controls, data-handling safeguards, complaint-response procedures, and reporting duties—without a trial on the merits and without an admission of liability.
- When private contact information is exposed, remedies may account for both broad consumer impact (standard payments to all affected subscribers) and heightened risks for certain individuals (additional amounts tied to safety concerns).

## Conclusion

In *California v. Comcast Cable Communications Management*, the Alameda County Superior Court entered a stipulated final judgment and permanent injunction after Comcast mistakenly provided approximately 75,000 paid unlisted VoIP subscriber numbers to a third-party online directory for about a year and a half despite customer complaints. The settlement required Comcast to pay $100 per affected subscriber, provide additional funds for subscribers who raised safety concerns, pay $25 million in state penalties, and operate under ongoing injunctive requirements aimed at preventing future disclosures of unlisted subscriber information.


California v. Comcast Cable Communications Management, Case No. 15786197 (2015)