1jeremy (talk | contribs)
m Phone number requirement for new accounts: Added source to the reasoning why google introduced forced phone number verification
1jeremy (talk | contribs)
Rodriguez v. Google LLC (21 May 2021 - 3 Sep 2025): Expanded on the potential payout, Google's appeal to a higher court, and how claim submission will begin after appeals process finishes, with relavent citations. Also added Thele v. Google LLC (11 November 2025 - Presnt): which discusses the suit alleging that Google secretly allowed Gemini access to private user data, with relevant citations.
 
Line 126: Line 126:


====Rodriguez v. Google LLC (21 May 2021 - 3 Sep 2025)====
====Rodriguez v. Google LLC (21 May 2021 - 3 Sep 2025)====
Google's "Web & App Activity" (WAA) setting had the ability to be paused. Reportedly, despite this setting being paused by consumers, Google would continue to collect consumer data regardless of consent.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Rodriguez v. Google LLC |url=https://www.googlewebappactivitylawsuit.com/Home/FAQ#faq1 |url-status=live |access-date=5 Apr 2025 |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20251011171640/https://googlewebappactivitylawsuit.com/Home/FAQ |archive-date=11 Oct 2025}}</ref> This case is currently ongoing and has yet to receive a judgment.<ref>[https://www.googlewebappactivitylawsuit.com/Home/Documents Important Documents] ([http://web.archive.org/web/20250911091039/https://googlewebappactivitylawsuit.com/Home/Documents Archived])</ref> Google collected mobile device data for eight years from users who opted out of tracking under the WAA.<ref name=":5">{{Cite web |last=Staab |first=Theresa |date=18 Sep 2025 |title=Someone is Always Watching: Implications of Google's WAA Privacy Case |url=https://lawreview.syr.edu/someone-is-always-watching-implications-of-googles-waa-privacy-case/ |access-date=26 Mar 2026 |website=Syracuse Law Review}}</ref> The dates of use/activity in question were between July 1, 2016 and September 23, 2024.<ref>{{Cite web |date=23 Oct 2024 |title=FAQs: Google Web App Activity lawsuit |url=https://help.wfu.edu/support/solutions/articles/13000825158-faqs-google-web-app-activity-lawsuit |url-status=live |access-date=26 Mar 2026 |website=Wake Forest University}}</ref> On September 3, 2025, the San Francisco Federal Court jury held Google liable two of three claims of privacy invasion. Google was charged $425 million for invasion of privacy, but not for punitive damages since the jury found that Google did not act with malicious intent.<ref name=":5" />
Google's "Web & App Activity" (WAA) setting had the ability to be paused. Reportedly, despite this setting being paused by consumers, Google would continue to collect consumer data regardless of consent.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Rodriguez v. Google LLC |url=https://www.googlewebappactivitylawsuit.com/Home/FAQ#faq1 |url-status=live |access-date=5 Apr 2025 |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20251011171640/https://googlewebappactivitylawsuit.com/Home/FAQ |archive-date=11 Oct 2025}}</ref> Google collected mobile device data for eight years from users who opted out of tracking under the WAA.<ref name=":5">{{Cite web |last=Staab |first=Theresa |date=18 Sep 2025 |title=Someone is Always Watching: Implications of Google's WAA Privacy Case |url=https://lawreview.syr.edu/someone-is-always-watching-implications-of-googles-waa-privacy-case/ |access-date=26 Mar 2026 |website=Syracuse Law Review}}</ref> The dates of use/activity in question were between July 1, 2016 and September 23, 2024.<ref>{{Cite web |date=23 Oct 2024 |title=FAQs: Google Web App Activity lawsuit |url=https://help.wfu.edu/support/solutions/articles/13000825158-faqs-google-web-app-activity-lawsuit |url-status=live |access-date=26 Mar 2026 |website=Wake Forest University}}</ref> On September 3, 2025, the San Francisco Federal Court jury held Google liable two of three claims of privacy invasion. The plaintiffs were awarded $425.7 million in compensatory damages for invasion of privacy, totaling around $4 per person for the approximate 98 million affected users, but since the jury found that Google did not act with malicious intent, no punitive damages were awarded.<ref name=":5" /><ref name=":6">{{Cite news |last=Mollman |first=Brittney |last2=Sosnicki |first2=Luke |date=2025-09-05 |title=Federal Jury Awards $425.7 Million in Google Privacy Case: Key Takeaways on Consent Design and Litigation Risk |url=https://www.thompsoncoburn.com/insights/federal-jury-awards-425-7-million-in-google-privacy-case-key-takeaways-on-consent-design-and-litigation-risk/ |url-status=live |access-date=2026-05-05 |work=Thompson Coburn LLP}}</ref> Google filed an appeal to this verdict "on the basis that the jury misunderstood the functionality of its privacy tools and that users were adequately informed through layered disclosures and consent flows"<ref name=":6" />. Claim submission may begin once the appeals process finishes<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-11-05 |title=$425M Verdict in Google Web & App Activity Privacy Class Action Lawsuit — Do You Qualify? |url=https://openclassactions.com/settlements/google-web-and-app-activity-privacy-class-action-lawsuit.php |url-status=live |access-date=2026-05-05 |website=OpenClassActions}}</ref>.
 
==== '''Thele v. Google LLC (11 November 2025 - Present)''' ====
On the 11th of November, 2025, Thomas Thele filed a demand for jury trial in a class action complaint against Google LLC. In the filing it states that "on or about October 10, 2025, Google secretly turned on Gemini for all its users’ Gmail, Chat, and Meet accounts, enabling AI to track its users’ private communications contained in those platforms without the users’ knowledge or consent" <ref>{{Cite web |last=Wolfson |first=Tina |last2=Ahdoot |first2=Robert |last3=Maya |first3=Theodore |last4=Brown |first4=Alyssa |date=2025-11-11 |title=UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL |url=https://www.classaction.org/media/thele-v-google-complaint_2.pdf |url-status=live |access-date=2026-05-05 |website=ClassAction}}</ref>. The suit "alleges that Google is violating the California Invasion of Privacy Act"<ref>{{Cite web |last=Burnson |first=Robert |date=2025-11-12 |title=Google sued for allegedly using Gemini AI to secretly track user data |url=https://www.business-standard.com/technology/tech-news/google-sued-for-allegedly-using-gemini-ai-to-secretly-track-user-data-125111200603_1.html |url-status=live |access-date=2026-05-05 |website=Business Standard}}</ref>, a law enacted in 1967 which dictates the terms by which advances in technology can be used for the purpose of invading the privacy of citizens<ref>{{Cite web |date=1967 |title=CHAPTER 1.5. Invasion of Privacy |url=https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&part=1.&title=15.&chapter=1.5 |url-status=live |access-date=2026-05-05 |website=California Legislative Information}}</ref>. The defendant, Google LLC, filed a Motion to Dismiss which is scheduled to be heard on May 1, 2026<ref>{{Cite web |date=2026-04-27 |title=Thele v. Google LLC |url=https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/61129560/Thele_v_Google_LLC |url-status=live |access-date=2026-05-05 |website=PacerMonitor}}</ref>.


===Anti-competitive Behavior===
===Anti-competitive Behavior===