Funko Website Data Tracking Wiretap Class Action Lawsuit, The “Reject All” Button Didn’t Work Your Data Was Tracked Anyway

Funko, the Everett, Washington-based collectibles company behind Pop! Vinyl figures, is facing a class action lawsuit filed May 9, 2026 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, alleging the company secretly tracked and transmitted shoppers’ personal data to Facebook, Google, and Salesforce — even after those users explicitly clicked “Reject All” on the website’s cookie consent banner. No settlement exists yet. This is an active lawsuit in its earliest stage.

Quick Facts: Dirksen et al. v. Funko, Inc.

Field	Detail
Lawsuit Filed	May 9, 2026
Defendant	Funko, Inc. (headquartered in Everett, Washington)
Lead Plaintiffs	Peter Dirksen, Aviva Copaken, Steven Beltran — all California residents
Alleged Violation	Federal Wiretap Act; California consumer protection and privacy laws
Third Parties Receiving Data	Facebook, Google, Salesforce (named in complaint)
Who Is Affected	Anyone who visited and interacted with Funko.com and whose data was intercepted and shared
California Subclass	California residents with additional state-specific privacy claims
Current Court Stage	Early litigation — class not yet certified
Court & Jurisdiction	U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington (Seattle)
Lead Law Firms	Tousley Brain Stephens (Seattle); Levi & Korsinsky (New York)
Damages Sought	$100 per day per violation or $10,000 per person under Wiretap Act
Settlement Status	TBD — no settlement; no claim form
Funko’s Response	No response to press requests as of publication
Next Hearing Date	TBD — newly filed
Last Updated	May 16, 2026

What Is the Funko Lawsuit About?

If you’ve ever shopped on Funko.com, you’ve seen the cookie banner. It pops up at the bottom of your browser asking whether you consent to tracking. You click “Reject All” — because you don’t want your browsing behavior sold to advertisers. According to this lawsuit, that click meant nothing.

Three users say Funko gave them false assurance that they have meaningful control over what data its website shares with third parties through a banner allowing them to purportedly manage their cookie preferences. The complaint describes a deliberate gap between what the banner promises and what the website actually does.

Dirksen’s attorneys claimed that the site began using cookies and other tracking tools before a user could even click “Reject All.” Additionally, they claimed that a user clicking “Reject All” didn’t affect whether a person’s data was collected or shared. The complaint states directly: “Indeed, even after users rejected non-essential Tracking Tools and selected only strictly necessary cookies, Defendant continued deploying Tracking Tools by, at a minimum, Facebook, Google, and Salesforce.”

The users accuse Funko of deceiving users by indicating that they could reject all tracking and disable the sale or disclosure of their data through cookies — when in fact the website placed tracking tools on users’ browsers and continued using those tools even after a user rejected all tracking.

The legal hook is the federal Wiretap Act — a statute that prohibits the interception, disclosure, or intentional use of electronic communications without consent. The plaintiffs say they were never asked to consent to the interception, but were instead falsely assured they could reject the tracking tools. Alongside the federal claim, the lawsuit raises California consumer protection and privacy laws — creating a separate California subclass for residents with additional state-specific remedies.

Related article: Luxury Brand Chrome Hearts Drops Trademark Lawsuit Against Neil Young Band Name Here’s What It Means

This case fits a well-established pattern of data privacy lawsuits targeting the gap between cookie consent banners and actual tracking behavior. For background on how these cases have developed across other consumer websites, see AllAboutLawyer.com’s data breach and privacy class action guide.

Are You Part of the Funko Class Action?

The plaintiffs seek to represent a class of people who visited and interacted with the Funko website, whose activity was intercepted, disclosed and shared through the website’s tracking tools. The suit includes a subclass for California for the state-specific claims.

You may be part of this class if:

• You visited Funko.com at any point and your browsing activity or personal data was collected and shared with third parties
• You clicked “Reject All” or otherwise attempted to opt out of non-essential cookies — and tracking continued anyway
• You are a U.S. resident who interacted with Funko’s website (with enhanced claims if you are a California resident)
• You browsed, added items to a cart, or made a purchase on the Funko webstore without consenting to data tracking

You are likely NOT included if:

• You explicitly accepted all cookies and consented to tracking — though the complaint’s core claim is that even rejection of cookies did not stop the tracking
• You accessed Funko only through third-party retail sites like Amazon, Target, or GameStop — not through Funko.com directly

You do not need to do anything right now. Most class members in a future settlement will be automatically included. The case has just been filed and class certification has not been granted. What matters today is understanding what happened and preserving any records you have of your Funko.com activity.

What Are Plaintiffs Seeking?

This is not a settlement — no money is available and no claim form exists. Here is what the plaintiffs are asking the court to award:

For Wiretap Act violations, the users are seeking damages of $100 per day per violation or $10,000 per person. That statutory damages framework is the same one used in other major website wiretapping cases — it doesn’t require plaintiffs to prove they suffered specific financial harm. The violation itself, if proven, triggers the remedy.

Beyond cash damages, the plaintiffs are asking the court to order Funko to stop its alleged tracking practices entirely — making its cookie consent banner actually work as advertised. They are also seeking attorneys’ fees and any other relief the court finds appropriate.

The complaint states: “When a company affirmatively represents that users may control whether their data is sold, shared, or tracked, but then secretly sells, shares, and tracks that data anyway, the misconduct is especially egregious.”

What Should You Do Right Now?

The lawsuit is brand new — filed just days ago. Here are the three things that matter most right now:

Document what you can. If you have order confirmation emails, browser history records, or screenshots from Funko.com — especially any showing the cookie banner and your interaction with it — save them. Evidence of your visit to the site and your rejection of cookies is what would connect you to the class.

Do nothing else for now. No registration, no fee, no form. Anyone asking you to pay to “join” this lawsuit at this stage is not legitimate. Class members are included automatically once the class is certified.

Stay informed. The case is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington in Seattle. Funko has not yet responded to the complaint as of this writing. Check AllAboutLawyer.com — this page will be updated as the court issues rulings, the class is certified, or a settlement is proposed.

If you are a California resident who believes you experienced specific privacy harms from Funko’s tracking — such as receiving targeted ads you did not consent to, or having your personal data sold to advertisers — you may have a stronger individual claim under California law. A free legal consultation with a data privacy attorney can help you evaluate whether an individual claim makes sense given your circumstances.

Funko Class Action Lawsuit Timeline

Milestone	Date
Funko.com allegedly begins deploying tracking tools before user consent	TBD — complaint covers period before filing
Complaint filed in U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington	May 9, 2026
Media reports published — KIRO 7, MyNorthwest, Everett Herald, Courthouse News	May 12–13, 2026
Funko has not responded to press requests	As of May 16, 2026
Funko response/answer to complaint	TBD — pending
Class Certification Motion	TBD — early litigation stage
Expected Settlement Timeline	TBD — no settlement discussions confirmed

Frequently Asked Questions

Is there a class action lawsuit against Funko? 

Yes. Three California residents filed a class action complaint in U.S. District Court in Seattle alleging that Funko collects and shares user data without permission, even after users click the “Reject All” button on the website’s cookie banner. The case was filed May 9, 2026 and is in its earliest stage.

Do I need to do anything right now to be included in the Funko lawsuit? 

No. Most Funko.com visitors whose data was intercepted will be automatically included if the class is certified. No registration or payment is required at this stage. Save any records of your Funko.com activity and monitor this page for updates.

What data did Funko allegedly collect and share?

 The complaint alleges the Funko website deployed tracking tools that transmitted users’ data to advertising, social media, and analytics companies — specifically identified in the complaint as Facebook, Google, and Salesforce. The data intercepted includes users’ online browsing behavior and interaction patterns on the Funko website.

Does it matter that I clicked “Reject All” on the cookie banner? 

That is actually the core of this lawsuit. The complaint specifically alleges that clicking “Reject All” did not stop the tracking. Plaintiffs say Funko lulled users into a false sense of security, privacy and control while simultaneously enabling third parties to monitor, intercept, and transmit users’ online behavior in real time.

How much could I receive from a Funko settlement? 

TBD — no settlement exists yet. If the Wiretap Act claims succeed, the statute allows for damages of $100 per day per violation or $10,000 per person. The actual amount class members receive in a future settlement depends on the number of valid claims and the total fund negotiated. Individual recoveries in website wiretapping settlements have historically ranged from tens to hundreds of dollars per person.

Can I file my own lawsuit against Funko instead?

 Yes. If you believe you suffered significant, documented harm from Funko’s alleged tracking practices — particularly as a California resident with claims under state privacy law — consult a data privacy attorney about individual options before any statute of limitations issues arise.

When will the Funko lawsuit settle?

 TBD — the case was filed May 9, 2026 and no response from Funko has been filed. Website wiretapping class actions of this type typically take 12 to 24 months to reach a settlement once active litigation begins. AllAboutLawyer.com will update this page the moment a settlement is proposed.

Sources & References

• Courthouse News Service — Funko fans cry foul over online tracking, May 2026
• The Everett Daily Herald — Everett-based Funko improperly collected user data on its site, lawsuit says, May 13, 2026
• Court Filing: Dirksen et al. v. Funko, Inc., U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, filed May 9, 2026

Prepared by the AllAboutLawyer.com Editorial Team and reviewed for factual accuracy against court filings and verified news reporting from Courthouse News Service, The Everett Daily Herald, and KIRO 7 / MyNorthwest dated May 2026. Last Updated: May 16, 2026

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Legal claims and outcomes depend on specific facts and applicable law. For advice regarding a particular situation, consult a qualified attorney.