IBM, which acquired the app in 2015, told the Verge: 'The Weather Company has always been transparent with use of location data; the disclosures are fully appropriate, and we will defend them vigorously'.
Los Angeles County is suing International Business Machines Corp.'s Weather Channel unit, accusing the company of misleading consumers about how their location data was being used.
In the report, Feuer claimed 80 percent of supposedly "45 million" app users agreed to terms the app would track geolocation data.
The owner of The Weather Channel mobile app denies any impropriety with sharing location data collected from users.
IBM Chief Executive Officer Ginni Rometty has used the attention around data privacy to try and differentiate IBM from other tech companies, saying the dominant consumer tech platforms should face more scrutiny from regulators. These weather often keep a track of our location in order to provide us the most accurate weather updates they can.
He hopes to be successful with his pursuit of this lawsuit, but also hopes to encourage other companies to be clearer with details of their data sharing and selling practices.
The IBM-owned Weather Channel app has been transmitting its users' precise geolocation data to advertisers and other third parties despite telling users that their location data was needed only for providing local weather data, according to a lawsuit filed Thursday by California government officials.
The app collects location data on where users live and work, as well as the places they visit throughout the day and night, according to the suit. TWC's app was targeted, he said, because it touches all demographics and seems benign and innocuous, because the company claims to have the largest trove of geolocation data and because the company did little to change its practices in the wake of the New York Times expose.
The lawsuit argues the Weather Company violated the Unfair Competition Law by engaging in a number of fraudulent business acts and practices, and seeks up to $2,500 in damages per violation of every California user of the app, making the potential legal cost in the millions or billions.
The case "goes to the core of one of today's most fundamental issues ... privacy in the digital age", Feuer said in his statement.