M.A.C. Cosmetics is facing a class action lawsuit in Illinois over its use of virtual try-on technology, with allegations that the company violated state privacy laws by collecting biometric data without consent. The complaint, filed in Cook County Circuit Court under the case name Javid v. M.A.C. Cosmetics, claims the brand failed to comply with requirements under Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA).
Allegations of Biometric Privacy Violations
The virtual try-on feature allows customers to preview makeup products through live video, overlaying lipstick and other cosmetics on their faces. According to the complaint, plaintiff Fiza Javid encountered the tool at a suburban Chicago M.A.C. store. She alleges that her facial geometry was scanned without written consent and without being informed of how her data would be collected, used, or retained—requirements spelled out under BIPA. The statute obliges companies to obtain explicit written consent, disclose the purpose of data collection, and outline data retention and destruction policies.
Under BIPA, violations can result in penalties of $1,000 per negligent violation or $5,000 per reckless or intentional violation, plus attorneys’ fees. The suit seeks to represent all Illinois residents whose biometric data was allegedly collected through the virtual try-on feature without proper notice or consent. As of the filing date, neither M.A.C. Cosmetics nor parent company Estée Lauder has issued a public statement in response.
Part of a Broader Trend
The lawsuit adds to a growing wave of BIPA litigation targeting beauty and retail brands that use virtual try-on technology. In February 2025, Charlotte Tilbury agreed to a $2.925 million settlement to resolve similar claims, with payments issued earlier this year. Estée Lauder, which owns M.A.C., faced a separate lawsuit in 2022 over online try-on tools, successfully defending portions of that case. Other retailers, including L’Oréal and Decorté, have also been challenged in Illinois courts over the use of facial recognition and virtual try-on systems.
Legal analysts note that companies have often argued their tools do not involve biometric data as defined by BIPA, or that consent was implied through online interactions. However, Illinois courts have increasingly allowed these cases to proceed, underscoring the high legal risk for retailers deploying interactive digital experiences without robust compliance frameworks.
Innovation Meets Regulation
The case illustrates the tension between retail innovation and privacy regulation. Virtual try-on tools have grown in popularity as a way to personalize shopping and drive online sales, but Illinois’ strict biometric privacy law continues to test the boundaries of what constitutes informed consent. As enforcement expands, companies in the cosmetics and fashion industries may need to adjust their digital offerings to ensure compliance.
The outcome of Javid v. M.A.C. Cosmetics could influence how beauty brands across the country design and disclose their biometric-enabled retail experiences.
Sources: Bloomberg Law, Law360, Top Class Actions
–
By Ali Nassar-Smith
