Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Google The Courts

Google Fails To End $5 Billion Consumer Privacy Lawsuit (reuters.com) 29

Posted by msmash from the tussle-continues dept.
A U.S. judge rejected Google's bid to dismiss a lawsuit claiming it invaded the privacy of millions of people by secretly tracking their internet use. From a report: U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on Monday said she could not find that users consented to letting Google collect information about what they viewed online because the Alphabet unit never explicitly told them it would. David Boies, a lawyer for the plaintiffs in the proposed $5 billion class action, called the decision "an important step in protecting the privacy interests of millions of Americans."

The plaintiffs alleged that Google's analytics, cookies and apps let the Mountain View, California-based company track their activity even when they set Google's Chrome browser to "Incognito" mode and other browsers to "private" browsing mode. They said this let Google learn enough about their friends, hobbies, favorite foods, shopping habits, and "potentially embarrassing things" they seek out online, becoming "an unaccountable trove of information so detailed and expansive that George Orwell could never have dreamed it."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Fails To End $5 Billion Consumer Privacy Lawsuit More

Google Fails To End $5 Billion Consumer Privacy Lawsuit

Comments Filter:

  • This is always the case with class actions and because the attorney cut is so large they settle for sums that provide nothing meaningful to the actual victims.

    But this could still make a difference if they require the data to be destroyed and bar future collection as conditions of the agreement. Even if they get what they ask for, $5 billion is just a cost of doing business and a bargain if it allows Google to wipe the slate of all liability to the entire class of victim.

  • Are the people who are mad, doing anything proactive to protect their security, privacy, or anonymity? Google didn't outright say, "we're going to digitally molest every piece of data you make available.", but what company does?

    Spin this around, what aspects of the plaintiff's digital lifestyles, lead them to trust or know their information is being handled in a safe and secure manner? Has Google promised they wouldn't look, listen, scan, read, and consume the information being offered freely?

    If Google
    • Your analogy ignores the fact that Google stalked people even when they used incognito mode and other privacy tools. It is more like your neighbor recording your activity in your house through gaps in your closed curtains.
      • Not really, incognito mode would be moving inside but standing in front of the open window, sure you've gone inside, but you've done little to improve your privacy posture. Install "DuckDuckGo", "Privacy Possum", "Privacy Badger", use a containerized OS like Qubes, and avoid any Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook, or other invasive service / tool / OS / app or software, and then if you still get tracked, you might have a case.

        The fact you're using Chrome, or GMail, Google Drive, Google Maps, even Andro

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by r0nc0 ( 566295 )
          This is not a reasonable argument in my opinion because it assumes capabilities on behalf of the users of Google's services that aren't true. One could establish that using SSL/HTTPS browsing for private/secure things provides a user with a reasonable assurance their information is not being used/stored/whatever by the operator of the platform. I don't think most people have any idea that this is going on to this extent - hence "reasonable". I could be wrong but my estimation of the average human's ability
          • You make a very good point, TLS or HTTPS (HTTP over TLS), is often just asserted baselessly, to be some all star security "all-in-one". It is shocking how frequently I have to explain that TLS does nothing to secure data, and I have to explain this to people in IT, Development, and technology in general. The fundamental problem is we've allowed tracking to become common place, it's expected for Microsoft, or Google to track you, and we don't mandate an opt-in approach.

            Imagine a world where software has

            • At this point the way forward should be the creation and active legal enofcement of strict privacy laws. Due to governments being either asleep at the wheel or, (in my opinion more likely) in active collusion with all these companies, we've now effectively got a huge private Stasi/KGB in operation worldwide. This is a direct assault on democracy and individual freedom.

              Companies should not be allowed to store any data on an individual whatsoever without it being directly related to transactions made with t

              • Yep, and that's the problem! Even more terrifying, the amount of data collection that happens with kids, and it's not trivial. I'm still in a fight with my daughter's school, and the board, over the data collection policies of the applications the kids are forced to use.

                I hear something like: "Applications for kids are completely restricted from collecting data", or, "We make sure no PII is ever uploaded to identify the kids.", or, "Google and Microsoft don't collect data on kids.", and so on, constantly.
    • yes, the people did, as it says in the summary, "The plaintiffs alleged that Google's analytics, cookies and apps let the Mountain View, California-based company track their activity even when they set Google's Chrome browser to "Incognito" mode and other browsers to "private" browsing mode. They said this let Google learn enough about their friends, hobbies, favorite foods, shopping habits, and "potentially embarrassing things" they seek out online, becoming "an unaccountable trove of information so detail
      • "Google's Chrome browser to "Incognito" mode and other browsers to "private" browsing mode", at what point did anyone think that changing browser settings and going "incognito" was going to stop the digital molestation? If they took reasonable steps, a few things would be true:

        1. They would have privacy respecting extensions installed such as DuckDuckGo, Privacy Possum, Privacy Badger.
        2. They would avoid all Google Services, Tools, Applications, and Software.
        3. They would run a privacy respecting OS
        • This is simple. Google is a private company, not a public space. So your analogy makes no sense. Google failed to provide notice to the customer that covered their collection and sale of data in the manner described in the suit. So the customer never gave Google permission to do so.
          • As alleged in the lawsuit from my understanding.
            • Okay, so does Walmart, Food Land, or any other "private" company disclose how much data they collect from you, who they partner with, and what your data is used for? Does Microsoft put disclaimers all over Windows that it's basically shareware infected with ad ware that collects your data nonstop? Why is Google the sole company who is getting pointed out as having done something that almost every other company, private, public, or even government is guilty of?
        • clearly you appear to have a greater in depth knowledge of this stuff... but that is NOT the legal standard, the legal standard is the mythical 'reasonable man' which means if I tell you that the control that you clicked makes it so I can't see what you're doing, the 'reasonable man' would presume I wasn't lying and that clicking the button was sufficient.

          The standard is not the 'paranoid man' who believes everything always is a lie and they must always take care of everything by themselves.

          You buy gaso

          • Okay, BUT, if 99% of the gas I buy is known either:

            1. Not to be gas.
            2. To be the wrong type of gas.
            3. The wrong grade of gas.
            4. To be hooked into legal terms that are known to be pervasive.

            Or some combination of other stupid scenarios, then you can't claim the "reasonable man" can think the gas is fine. Let's assume Google actually released a product that was Libra, Privacy Respecting, Secure, and left you completely safe, sound, alone, protected and all that good stuff. Would you believe them by
        • what???? You didn't roll your own VPN? You are TRUSTING that the company who provides your VPN service is honest with you and not selling all your data on the marketplace?

          Well, clearly you are TRUSTING some company to do as they say they will!

          • Yes, some companies I trust because their track record is clean, they open source the code, and they get audits done to back themselves up. Trusting a company, doesn't mean I'm blind and obedient with them, it just means they're one step or tool in my setup / lifestyle.

            As I said clearly in the thread you replied to, use extensions like DuckDuckGo, Privacy Possum and Privacy Badger. Use a proper and clean OS, which means NOT Windows, macOS, Bundled Android, and so on. Just because I run a VPN from Prot
            • I do some of those things, others, well, to be honest, others are above my skill level. But, the average person in the street? I used to consult for private clients and they couldn't stand the level of security I would set them up with, circumventing it every time... every time getting infected and having me clean their machines, only to tell me to NOT set them up with the minimum reasonable security, because it was more than they would deal with. Some Judge somewhere is then using those people as their mod
              • Okay, fairly, you realize the "reasonable man" is not reasonable. Everyone thinks the 10 seconds of extra time at login or 5 seconds while opening the browser is costing them so much productivity as to cancel any attempt to accomplish work. I honestly had this argument this morning with my boss, who refuses to approach anything that could, even by accident, be considered acceptable, in terms of security awareness, and his title would lead anyone to believe he's an expert.

                A few years ago, a woman put Gor

  • Yeah, Google is really worried about this I'm sure. It will take 5 to 8 years for this to work its way through the courts. Putting pocket change aside each year for the actual eventual amount (which will be less) is nothing to a company this size.

    • yep, and that law firm will be set for life, whilst I and other Google users will most likely net something like $9.95 each.
  • Google is definitely evil and should be stopped. But like with the 1%, or any other dictators⦠If there is a large room. where there is one dick, and there are 99 people doing nothing but bitch and keep going, then clearly, the dick is not the only problem in the room. That kind of thing only works if roughly 90 of them are shruggers and 9 are Uncle Toms. (Research says it takes 10% to change something or.keep a status quo.) It's nice that they at least sued. And I certainly get the appeal of

  • Is that the same David Boies of SCO vs IBM fame? If it is, pity the plaintiffs.

  • $5b is a margin of error for a company with a market cap rapidly approaching $2t today

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gweihir ( 88907 )

      Indeed. For this type of criminal behavior, people (like the CEO) need to go behind bars and have their personal fortune impounded.

  • I'm a dumbass so please enlighten me: Why is it that people can sue Google for violating their privacy as a fact of the matter, but people can't sue the government for doing the same through the Snowden revelations without proving that they were harmed? Is it because by having a Google account and using Google services it's considered proven that harm happened? But with the government you can't prove they surveilled you directly, right?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gweihir ( 88907 )

      Because like in any nice proto-fascism, the government is above the law. One of the reliable signs in which direction things are heading.

Slashdot Top Deals

What good is a ticket to the good life, if you can't find the entrance?

Close