• by Wendy Davis , December 18, 2025

Siding against Amazon, a federal appellate court has ruled that consumers can move forward with a class-action lawsuit over claims that the company violated an Illinois biometric privacy law by allegedly collecting and storing facial recognition data of people who used "virtual try on" technology to test makeup and eyewear.

The ruling, issued Wednesday by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, upholds a decision issued by U.S. District Court Judge Jorge Alonso in the Northern District of Illinois. He held in March 2024 that the matter could proceed as a class-action on behalf of everyone who used a virtual try-on feature on Amazon's mobile website or app while in Illinois after September 7, 2016.

Wednesday's ruling comes in a dispute dating to 2021, when an Illinois resident named Tanya Svoboda alleged that she uploaded photos of her face to Amazon in order to virtually test out different lipsticks. A second person, Antonella Ortiz Colosi, later joined the lawsuit.

They alleged in an amended complaint that Amazon's virtual try-on feature violated the Illinois Biometric Privacy Information Act, which prohibits companies from collecting and storing facial recognition data without users' written consent, and requires companies to disclose policies for shedding the data. The law provides for damages up to $5,000 per individual.

Amazon denied that it violated the law, arguing in a motion for summary judgment that its virtual try-on technology runs on users' devices.

"No information about users’ faces ever leaves those devices," Amazon argued, adding that the data is deleted from users' devices when they close the app or mobile browsing window.

Alonso rejected Amazon's motion for summary judgment for now, but said the company could renew its arguments after more evidence was exchanged between itself and the plaintiffs.

The company also argued in a separate motion that the matter shouldn't proceed as a class action, writing in papers filed last year that the claims "raise major issues that can be resolved only with an analysis of each individual class member’s circumstances and each individual class member’s particular use of [virtual try-on] technology."

Amazon added that determining whether a particular person used the technology while in Illinois would require a case-by-case analysis.

Alonso rejected that argument as well, ruling that the matter could move forward as a class action.

Amazon then asked the 7th Circuit to reverse Alonso's decision regarding class-action status.

A three-judge panel of that court ruled against Amazon, writing that the case will turn on "common questions" regarding Amazon's alleged use of virtual try-on technology.

"Some common questions require expert discovery to analyze the [virtual try-on] software. None will benefit from repeated adjudication," Circuit Judge Michael Scudder wrote in an opinion joined by Ilana Rovner and David Hamilton.

But the judges suggested that Amazon could raise the issue again, after more facts emerged.

"It warrants emphasis that class certification does not carry any permanency," Scudder wrote. "The district court should remain vigilant in monitoring the propriety of certification as the case develops."