Privacy Law Essentials: New York City Biometric Identifier Law Goes into Effect
Privacy, Cyber & AI Decoded Alert | 2 min read
Jul 13, 2021
Hinshaw summer associate Jenny Li contributed to the research and drafting of this alert.
On January 10, 2021, the New York City Council enacted a biometric identifier information law. The law went into effect on July 9, 2021.
What type of information is covered?
The law covers biometric identifier information, which is a physiological or biological characteristic used to identify an individual. Such biometric information includes, but is not limited to, a retina or iris scan, a fingerprint or voiceprint, or a hand or face geometry scan.
Biometric information collected through photographs or video recordings are not implicated if the images or videos collected are not analyzed by software that identifies individuals based on physiological or biological characteristics, and the images or videos are not shared with third parties who are not law enforcement agencies.
What obligations does the law impose, and to whom does the law apply?
The law imposes two obligations: a signage requirement and a prohibition on profiting from the exchange of biometric information.
The signage requirement only implicates commercial establishments that collect, retain, convert, store, or share customer biometric information. Under the signage requirement, a commercial establishment (defined as a place of entertainment, retail store, or food and drink establishment) must post a clear and conspicuous sign near all of its entrances. The signs must use plain, simple language to notify customers that the establishment collects, retains, converts, stores, or shares customer biometric information. The NYC Department of Consumer and Worker Protection has provided a sign for commercial establishments to use.
The prohibition applies more broadly than the signage requirement. The prohibition implicates any individual or entity who sells, leases, or trades biometric information or exchanges biometric information for anything of value.
Are there any exceptions to the law?
Government agencies, employees, or agents are exempt from all obligations of the law. Financial institutions are exempt only from the signage requirement.
How is the law enforced?
Individuals have a private right of action to sue over violations of the law. Individuals can recover $500 for each violation of a commercial establishment’s failure to post a clear and conspicuous sign, $500 for each negligent violation of the prohibition against profiting from the exchange of biometric information, and $5,000 for each intentional or reckless violation of the prohibition against profiting from the exchange of biometric information. Individuals may also recover attorneys’ fees and costs.
Individuals suing for violations of the signage requirement must give written notice to the commercial establishment at least 30 days before bringing suit. If within 30 days of receiving the written notice the commercial establishment cures the violation and sends a written statement that the violation has been cured and the violation will not occur again, then the individual cannot sue for that specific violation. However, no written notice or opportunity to cure is required before bringing suit for violations of the prohibition against profiting from the exchange of biometric information.
Related Capabilities
Featured Insights

Press Release
Aug 7, 2026
Daniel McGrath Re-Elected Senior Director of the Federation of Defense & Corporate Counsel

Insights for Insurers Alert
Aug 7, 2026
California Supreme Court Clarifies Pleading Standards for Excess Policy Claims

Press Release
Aug 6, 2026
Charles Townsend Named a Best Mentor Finalist in the 2026 ALM Texas Legal Awards

Webinar
Aug 5, 2026
April Toy Moderates HNBA Webinar on AI in the Practice of Law

Privacy, Cyber & AI Decoded Alert
Aug 5, 2026
2026 AI Compliance: Upcoming Laws Every Organization Needs to Know

Press Release
July 21, 2026 | Updated on August 4, 2026
Three Hinshaw Attorneys Named to the 2026 National Black Lawyers’ Top 40 Under 40 List

Healthcare Alert
Aug 3, 2026
Fixing the Emergency Refill Trap: What California’s AB 1587 Means for Pharmacies

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Jul 30, 2026
Should Text Messages be Considered “Calls” Under the TCPA? The Seventh Circuit Says No

Healthcare Alert
Jul 30, 2026
California Courts Sharply Curtail the MICRA Damages Cap in Nursing Home Litigation

Insights for Insurers Alert
Jul 30, 2026
Analyzing a Couple of Cases Involving Exclusions in D&O Policies

In The News
Jul 29, 2026
Hinshaw Authors Contribute Two Articles in Latest Edition of the CCFL Quarterly Report

Webinar
Jul 28, 2026
Cathy Mulrow-Peattie and Sabrina Janeiro Present on Legal AI Technology
