Google Ordered To Pay $315 Million for Taking Data From Idle Android Phones

A California jury has ordered Google to pay $314.6 million to Android smartphone users in the state after finding the company liable for collecting data from idle devices without permission.

The San Jose jury ruled Tuesday that Google sent and received information from phones while idle, creating "mandatory and unavoidable burdens shouldered by Android device users for Google's benefit." The 2019 class action represented an estimated 14 million Californians who argued Google consumed their cellular data for targeted advertising purposes.

Great News ...

[machineghost]

... I can't wait for my check for $3.46 to arrive in two years!

Re:

[svx]

Your compensation is irrelevant. The fact that Google will have to pay is not. And it should a reoccurring fine until they fucking leave the users' data alone.

Re:

[nightflameauto]

Your compensation is irrelevant. The fact that Google will have to pay is not. And it should a reoccurring fine until they fucking leave the users' data alone.

Google/Alphabet's profits last year alone were over $100 billion. Something tells me this $315 million dollar fine may barely register as relevant to them.

Re:

[ihavesaxwithcollies]

Google/Alphabet's profits last year alone were over $100 billion. Something tells me this $315 million dollar fine may barely register as relevant to them.

They should pay their employees more. The employees should form a union and strike until then.

Re: Great News ...

[drinkypoo]

That fine is a stupid fucking joke amount. It's not even enough to make Google flinch.

Re:

[Rinnon]

Indeed. So many laws are toothless once a company gets big enough to shrug off the fines. I'd prefer to see a % of annual revenue (or something similar) so that it can scale up or down to the size of the company.

Re:

[hwstar]

Some would think that day fines (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day-fine) unconstitutional, or un-american. However the balance of power between the digital services company and its customers ^H^H^H^H^H product needs to be held in check, and day fines are certainly one tool in the toolbox.

Re:

[hambone142]

$22.00 per user but legal fees are deducted from the amount. Whoop dee doo......

Re:

[hwstar]

You won't even get cash. You'll get some coupon to use at a store to buy a junk product that you probably shouldn't purchase in the first place. Meanwhile the lawyers representing the class will make off with half of the award or more.

We need legislation which limits the amount of compensation the lawyers get in class action lawsuits.

Class action lawsuits should only be used in in situations where there is evidence that the company has caused a lot of damage to consumers -- yet we see them for the most friv

Re: Great News ...

[dj245]

Because that's what class actions are for. A company harms a lot of people, but it only hurts each a little bit. Individually it would be frivolous to sue, but as a group of harmed people you can exact a legal win to punish the company. And lawyers who can package up a group of people and present the harm to a judge need to be compensated because otherwise the class action lawsuit wouldn't happen. Class action lawsuits don't always end in justice, but they are a reasonably efficient method to try to find i

you get .002 cents per KB of data!

[Joe_Dragon]

you get .002 cents per KB of data!

Precedent?

[nightflameauto]

Does this set a precedent for going after other tech companies for similar behavior? Google's hardly the only phone maker that's scarfing data while the device is idle.

Re:

[phantomfive]

The precedent was set in an earlier case, and the precedent is that "data transfer can be considered property." That is, if Google is found to be 'stealing' data (ie, using cell phone resources that the user gets charged for), then they can be held liable for that.

The jury trial in this case found that Google was "stealing" through transferring (ie, giving the user a higher cell phone bill), but that was a question of fact determined by a jury, so it doesn't set a precedent on questions of law. There's no

Not a big enough fine

[jenningsthecat]

Unless fines severely hurt profitability and get shareholders bitching loudly, then they're a mere cost of business and not a deterrent. Legislators and courts need to get it through their thick heads that fines for such abuses need to be at least an order of magnitude larger than they typically are. If an initial fine doesn't make it clear that subsequent fines will be on the scale of existential threats, then it's too small.

Even at that, one or two companies might have to be driven to bankruptcy by fines in order for the oligarchs to understand that the government isn't fucking around. Of course, that's not going to happen under the current administration. But if the next election - assuming there even is one - cleans house the way I hope it will, then various abuses by Big Tech are going to be punished the way they should be.

a good precedent

[ZipNada]

Good to see this ruling. Now there needs to be something similar for all the apps on your phone that are sending whatever data they can collect to multiple brokers.

Re:

[Mononymous]

Use a Google-free ROM, and don't install the proprietary Google apps.
If you must have compatible libraries for the sake of some proprietary apps, the microG [microg.org] Project has substitutes for most of them.

Privacy rapists

[khchung]

That's what we should call companies like Google.