Google Faces $5 Billion Lawsuit In US For Tracking 'Private' Internet Use (reuters.com) 42
Google was sued on Tuesday in a proposed class action accusing the internet search company of illegally invading the privacy of millions of users by pervasively tracking their internet use through browsers set in "private" mode. Reuters reports: The lawsuit seeks at least $5 billion, accusing the Alphabet unit of collecting information about what people view online and where they do their browsing, despite using what Google calls Incognito mode. The complaint said Google surreptitiously collects data through Google Analytics, Google Ad Manager and other applications and website plug-ins, including smartphone apps, regardless of whether users click on Google-supported ads. This helps the Mountain View, California-based company learn details about users' friends, hobbies, favorite foods, shopping habits, and even the "most intimate and potentially embarrassing things" they search for online, the complaint said.
Google "cannot continue to engage in the covert and unauthorized data collection from virtually every American with a computer or phone," the complaint said. The complaint said the proposed class likely includes "millions" of Google users who since June 1, 2016 browsed the internet in "private" mode. It seeks damages per user of $5,000 or three times actual damages, whichever is greater, for violations of federal wiretapping and California privacy laws.
Google "cannot continue to engage in the covert and unauthorized data collection from virtually every American with a computer or phone," the complaint said. The complaint said the proposed class likely includes "millions" of Google users who since June 1, 2016 browsed the internet in "private" mode. It seeks damages per user of $5,000 or three times actual damages, whichever is greater, for violations of federal wiretapping and California privacy laws.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Poor google (Score:4, Insightful)
When I open an incognito window in Chrome, it displays a message in the center of the window, telling me what information is and isn't being collected.
If people fail to read a warning message on an otherwise blank window, right in front of their nose, I don't see how that is Google's fault.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
I remember a time when browsers didn't collect information and only rendered HTML.
There are still browsers that don't collect data.
If you choose not to use one of them, how is that Google's fault?
Google is an advertising company. There is no secret about that. They collect data. They tell you that they are collecting data with an "in your face" message.
What else do you expect them to do?
Re:Poor google (Score:4)
Re:Poor google (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
If a compnay has something to sell and its web site display nothing without JS enable (NoScript), I simply go somewhere else and spend my money on a competitor site.
Same thing for ANY web sites : blank page without JS enable == blacklist.
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair Google can't really not track people in Incognito Mode because one of the main goals of that mode is to be completely transparent to websites. There were too many sites blocking access to Incognito Mode browsers by detecting it with Javascript shenanigans, so they made it impossible.
If that's all this lawsuit is then they are punishing Google for doing the right thing by making Incognito Mode really good.
"other people who use the device won't see your hi (Score:5, Interesting)
Maybe there is some way to argue that Google broke some law, but I don't see a good argument being made here based around incognito mode.
The message you get every time you ooen an incognito window seems pretty clear to *me*. It says:
"other people who use the device won't see your history"
That's the claim it makes about being more private.
In case the user thinks it does more, it goes in to say your information may still be visible to:
Web sites you visit
Your employer
Your ISP
Your school
Search engines
Etc
It's not written in legalese or fine print. It's pretty much in-your-face.
Re: (Score:2)
I cut & pasted the text here:
You've gone incognito
Now you can browse privately, and other people who use this device won't see your activity. However, downloads and bookmarks will be saved. Learn more
Chrome won't save the following information:
Your browsing history
Cookies and site data
Information entered in forms
Your activity might still be visible to:
Websites you visit
Your employer or school
Your internet service provider
Re: (Score:2)
When I open an incognito window in Chrome, it displays a message in the center of the window, telling me what information is and isn't being collected.
If people fail to read a warning message on an otherwise blank window, right in front of their nose, I don't see how that is Google's fault.
Well, if Chrome is actually lying, Google could be in trouble. I'd be surprised if that were the case, but Google has surprised me a lot recently. Heck, they surprised their own management with the YouTube "Communist Bandits" censorship.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, if Chrome is actually lying, Google could be in trouble.
The only claim they make is that in incognito mode your history is not updated and cookies are not saved.
That is easy to verify. So they aren't lying.
Re: (Score:2)
The wording is such that the browser won't tell anyone, but any site you visit could, and probably will, including Google sites themselves.
Re: (Score:1)
Ah, but you are approaching this with the "reasonable man on the bus" frame of mind, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org], nothing at all to do with a fucked-up legal system where people get millions when they tip coffee over themselves https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] and LEOs can kill minorities and others with impunity, (mostly).
The rapacious lawyers love this kind of crap; even if the class action fails, they get the publicity. If it succeeds, they pocket millions (billions?) and each plaintif gets a few
rather than a class action (Score:2)
kind of like that guys website that fights parking tickets for you, a point click small claims court checklist to sue google over this would
Not sure what the basis is here (Score:2)
To me it's aways been a healthy competition between, how secure is this incognito mode vs. how much can Google divine about me through this flimsy screen.
Wouldn't the browser makers be more liable for accidentally leaking info to Google?
I guess if the goal is to get lots of settlement money though, you are better off going after Google than Mozilla....
Re: Not sure what the basis is here (Score:2)
I didn't think of this before, but I suppose that Google has super cookies that track you by IP. That comes pretty close to making Incognito mode pointless.
Not sure if I'd be a member of the class because I use a script blocker. (ScriptSafe in my case.)
Re: (Score:2)
It's what I've been saying. Login IDs are old school. IP addresses are sufficient, when combined with a massive AI effort to analyze every page, and every picture their web crawler can get its fingers on. Your profile is like a fingerprint, as stories here have talked about, so if your ISP switches your technically dynamic IP address to a new one, the AI will quickly re-match it to the new one.
Ohhh I forgot about tracking mouse movements, another fingerprint capability.
Ohhh, I forgot about selling your b
The only winners in a class action lawsuit (Score:5, Informative)
Are the lawyers.
Most of the people who receive anything from settlements, will get something like a $5 google play credit. The lawyers will make hundreds of millions.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm going to go through their evidence and see if there is basis for a GDPR complaint in the EU. I won't get any money directly from that but the massive fine will go into the coffers of governments to be spent for my benefit. They have their own lawyers on staff too.
Re: (Score:2)
It is your right to opt out of any class action lawsuit, you know. You are then free to sue Google on your own and claim your damages entirely for yourself and your lawyer.
Just that I know you probably won't. Why? Because the "lawyers making millions" really means about $100 tops per person for damages. By the time you factor in your time off f
Re: (Score:1)
No Shock Here (Score:2)
They track everything. A friend of mine who is a therapist has been doing appointments on her phone for clients. She has started getting ads for things she has been discussing in session. No searches, etc. that would do it. Just her sessions.
Re: (Score:2)
I've heard that it's basically Instagram that eavesdropping on people's conversations - I mean it's perfect: who'd think a stupid picture app would listen in on people, right?
Now I know IG is a Fucked^H^H^H^H^Hacebook property, but I'm sure everything of Google's does the same. No wonder they're both called privacy rapists. [urbandictionary.com]
True Story (Score:1)
"Ok google. how does it feel to be on the hook for five billion dollars for fucking with us?""
Kanye West - So Appalled Lyrics | Genius Lyrics
Kendrick Lama - Money Trees Lyrics | Genius Lyrics
All Trump News | What The Fuck Just Happened Today?
Confessions of a Real-Life Unicorn | GQ
The Whole Fucking Paradigm - Paris Review
Time to break up Google (Score:3)
Google is a monopoly that is unfairly leveraging its monopoly position. They should be broken up with the browser separated from the search monopoly.
Re: (Score:2)
They should be broken up with the browser separated from the search monopoly.
...and the search monopoly broken up from the advertising monopoly.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Go will probably be a pretty cool company for board games, but I predict Ogle will continue to be just as creepy.
Link to filing etc (Score:5, Informative)
As I had a bit of trouble finding the case filing it's Brown et al v Google LLC et al, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, No. 20-03664 https://www.insurancejournal.c... [insurancejournal.com] (link goes to lawsuit) The plaintiffs are thus far: Chasom Brown, Maria Nguyen and William Byatt and they are represented by Boies Schiller & Flexner (yes, that's David Boies, well know to longtime /. readers for the SCO vs IBM lawsuit).
The legal basis they refer to is:
(1) FEDERAL WIRETAP VIOLATIONS, 18 U.S.C. 2510, ET. SEQ.;
(2) INVASION OF PRIVACY ACT VIOLATIONS, CAL. PENAL 631 & 632;
(3) INVASION OF PRIVACY; AND
(4) INTRUSION UPON SECLUSION
This also violates the GDPR. (Score:2)
So add these multiple fines to the cost for google.
noScript (Score:2)
I do not *EVER* allow google analytics, etc.
online privacy (Score:1)
So what's the problem exactly (Score:2)
Private mode, incognito, etc... is only local. It is clearly explained when you open a private window, both in Chrome and Firefox.
Websites shouldn't even know that you are in private mode. And websites using trackers will not make a difference and will continue tracking you, the only difference is that their cookie will disappear once you leave the session. So why blame Google? They act exactly like any other web site, and Chrome implements private mode like any other browser. Sure, Google tracks you, but s