Google burns few hours of profit to disappear location privacy lawsuit

Google will pay $85 million to settle a privacy lawsuit that accused the internet behemoth of deceiving netizens regarding its harvesting of people's location data and using this personal info to rake in billions of dollars in advertising revenue. Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich (R) sued Google in May 2020 over these …

[Kevin McMurtrie]

The Google meme

$85 million? I forgot how to count that low.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The Google meme

Should be more like 85 billion instead. And jail time for the executives who allowed this to happen. Stalking shoule be a criminal offence no matter whether it's done by an individual or a corporation.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The Google meme

If an individual did this, such as a teenage hacker for example, then he would be jailed for cyberstalking, it would all be on the news, a major outcry, etc... But when a corporation does it barely anyone reacts to it and a small fine is imposed, which is just dismissed by the corporation as "the cost of doing business". Those in power can get away with almost anything. And the vast majority of the public remain apathetic.

[Brian 3]

These cut price settlements are a crime against humanity. The minimum price of the settlement MUST BE at least equal to the total profit of the venture involved in the wrongdoing. Otherwise it is just a cost of doing business and no fault claimed? BS. No more!

[John Brown (no body)]

Agreed. Settled means "out of court", ie this isn't a fine in the legal sense. States should not be allowed to "settle" like this unless a very high bar is reached.

[Anonymous Coward]

Nosey Android

I've got a cheap 5000mwH battery cell phone I use only as a GPS when bicycle riding because it's cheaper than a Garmin - no SIM card. Unfortunately sometimes it gets very aggressive about telling me I need to improve location information "OK - Cancel", which means connect to wifi or bluetooth, I presume. "I've told you NO a thousand times already!".

[sreynolds]

Re: Nosey Android

Tried flashing an OS that isn't loaded with Chinese spyware?

[Neil Barnes]

...said it will continue its efforts to harvest less user data

Because all the world knows how difficult it is to _not_ do something!

[Mike 137]

Biology updated?

""Google's parent company Alphabet""

By some strange evolutionary shift, Goooooooogle was able to engender its own 'parent'. Having done that that, there's probably no limit to what it can get away with.

[Marty McFly]

"Google also admits no wrongdoing"

Can someone tell me how the hell we ended up here?

Arizona's view: File a lawsuit, get free money.

Google's view: Here is $85M to go away.

This is a government entity shaking down a deep pocketed company for money, plain & simple It seems to me we should hold our government to a higher standard. Pursue the conviction, not the money.

If the government's case against Google is so strong, it should be followed through to conviction. If the government's case is not strong enough to generate a conviction, then the government should not be filing the lawsuit in the first place!

Isn't this an inherent conflict of interest for the State of Arizona? The State, through its Attorney General, files a lawsuit. The State, through its Superior Court, accepts a settlement. The State receives $80M for their general fund.

The State should NOT be allowed to 'settle' lawsuits where the State is the financial benefactor of the settlement!

Maybe this word does not mean what I think it means.

[nobody who matters]

Re: "Google also admits no wrongdoing"

I am afraid that where the Merriam Webster dictionary is involved, I find quite a lot of words do not seem to mean what the Oxford English Dictionary tells me they do. This side of the pond, the OED takes precedence over all others!

Over the other side of the pond, it often seems that most words can be made to mean whatever the speaker wishes them to mean.

[deadlockvictim]

Re: "Google also admits no wrongdoing"

This is one way of taxing companies.

[PRR]

What's it worth to YOU?

Arizona: 7 million people, $85M fine, $12/head

Australia: 26 million people, US$42M fine, $1.6/head

So my location privacy for a year is worth less than the latest restaurant dinner that Google has geo-tagged me with?

And Arizonians' location privacy is worth 7X the value of Australians'?

Or are Australians just that much less susceptible to internet advertising?

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: What's it worth to YOU?

Sounds about right. If/when a similar case comes up in the UK *we* will probably end up paying Google.

[Binraider]

GPS, according the phone : Off.

Physical location? The national agricultural centre.

Adverts appearing? "Grants for planting hedgerows".

Coincidence? Definitely not. This is not unique to google by any stretch of the imagination.

[Anonymous Coward]

Pay the tax keep the profits and stay out of jail

Ahh the life of the super rich, they can do no wrong, long as they pay off the government.

but when I try and offer a donut or a 20 when I get pulled over for speeding, I get arrested for two crimes, not fair. lol