Judge Rules Google Must Face Lawsuit Alleging Chrome Tracks Users in Incognito Mode

[MacRumors]

A judge in California has ruled that Google must face a class action lawsuit alleging that it secretly tracks the online activity of Chrome users even when they're using the browser in its privacy-oriented Incognito mode (via Bloomberg).

The lawsuit was filed in June by three plaintiffs alleging that Google hoovers up user 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.

The plaintiffs claim that Google is therefore deceiving customers into believing that they have control over the information they share with the company when they use Chrome's private browsing mode, and in doing so, violates federal wiretap laws.

According to the plaintiffs, the lawsuit likely covers "millions" of Google users who since June 1, 2016 browsed the internet using Incognito mode. The proposed class action therefore seeks $5,000 in damages per user for violations of federal wiretapping and California privacy laws, amounting to at least $5 billion.

Google attempted to have the case thrown out by arguing that the plaintiffs consented to its privacy policy, which the company said explicitly discloses its data protection practices.

"Google also makes clear that 'Incognito' does not mean 'invisible,' and that the user's activity during that session may be visible to websites they visit, and any third-party analytics or ads services the visited websites use," Google said in a court filing.

However, U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh ruled that the company "did not notify users that Google engages in the alleged data collection while the user is in private browsing mode."

Google has said it will defend itself "vigorously" against the claims.

Article Link: Judge Rules Google Must Face Lawsuit Alleging Chrome Tracks Users in Incognito Mode

 

[topgunn]

"If you are not paying for it, you’re not the customer; you’re the product being sold."

 

[Apple Knowledge Navigator]

Google’s definition of ‘incognito’: Dark Mode

 

[SBlue1]

What did the guy think, incognito meant he was invisible to websites and tracking??? LOL!

 

[LV426]

The Great White Shark in Jaws also "defended itself vigorously" when under attack.

 

[Shanghaichica]

What did the guy think, incognito meant he was invisible to websites and tracking??? LOL!

It just means it doesn’t show up in browsing history. But it doesn’t mean that the internet service provider or the browser OEM can’t see what you’re doing.

 

[LeeW]

Don't think Google has anything to worry about here. More about peoples inability to understand how incognito mode actually works.

 

[BigBobMansfield]

Hope Google get shut down cos of this. People should switch to Safari

 

[robertcoogan]

Sort of a double-edged sword here. If someone uses a Google product, then Google has the right to collect information for their own purposes (such as making their product better, targeting certain groups of customers in order to sell their products, etc.). What I think is that they don't have the right to then sell that information to other companies, because that information belongs to me. In using their products, I acknowledge that they can use that information for their own purposes.

But even in incognito mode, you're still using a Google product. And they still have the right to collect information to make their products better (according to their EULA, which you agree to when you use their product). Much of this has to do with the fact that people don't know what Google does with this information, and Google's reputation is such that they are perceived as being duplicitous and/or nefarious (or whatever) when it comes to how they use it.

Hopefully this goes to a jury, I'm content to let them decide. For example, where does Google draw the line when it comes to what type of information they collect when you are in public versus Incognito mode? I don't know, and it doesn't seem like anybody but Google knows the answer to that question (definitively). It would help if Google was clearer with their EULA, for one.

Or you can do what I do, and don't use Google products. There are other free and paid options out there for people to use. It's up to you.

 

[Apple_Robert]

Hope Google get shut down cos of this. People should switch to Safari

Unfortunately, I don't think that will happen. Too many people are in love with Google, even though they know it is bad for them.

 

[0057252]

Firefox is the way to go! 👍🏻

 

[easy4lif]

There is no such thing as a free lunch.

 

[SkyRom]

macOS - Platforms - PRISM Break

Opt out of global data surveillance programs like PRISM, XKeyscore and Tempora. Help make mass surveillance of entire populations uneconomical! We all have a right to privacy, which you can exercise today by encrypting your communications and ending your reliance on proprietary services.

prism-break.org

 

[ericwn]

"If you are not paying for it, you’re not the customer; you’re the product being sold."

Who are you quoting?

 

[jlc1978]

Interesting how Hoover has joined Googling in its name becoming a verb - hoovering.
$5,000 per user - I doubt any Chrome users will see 5 cents.

 

[ericwn]

It just means it doesn’t show up in browsing history. But it doesn’t mean that the internet service provider or the browser OEM can’t see what you’re doing.

Hence misleading product name. A costly mistake.
Like selling a suit as bulletproof, except for certain bullets.

 

[ericwn]

Hope Google get shut down cos of this. People should switch to Safari

Exactly. Let them use their google services there.

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

"Google also makes clear that 'Incognito' does not mean 'invisible,' and that the user's activity during that session may be visible to websites they visit, and any third-party analytics or ads services the visited websites use," Google said in a court filing.

But wouldn’t Google not be counted as a third-party in this case, since they are the software maker?

 

[InGen]

Disappointing to see what has manifested as the definition of "Incognito" mode on current browsers. What could have been the addition of Tor-like security and privacy features designed to protect the user when visiting certain parts of the internet has instead become an insignificant "hide this browsing history from my family" feature.

 

[Böhme417]

Interesting how Hoover has joined Googling in its name becoming a verb - hoovering.
$5,000 per user - I doubt any Chrome users will see 5 cents.

Pretty sure using Hoover as a verb happened way before Google ever existed...

 

[rictus007]

"If you are not paying for it, you’re not the customer; you’re the product being sold."

Yes, definitively but don’t forget people like Uber, Instacart, etc that they spy on you even though you pay for the service

 

[nicho]

Interesting how Hoover has joined Googling in its name becoming a verb - hoovering.
$5,000 per user - I doubt any Chrome users will see 5 cents.

“Hoover”

Verb, transitive, from the brand of vacuum cleaner, which was apparently hugely popular in the U.K in the mid-20th-century period. The OED reports that the literal verb–that is, to clean by m…

notoneoffbritishisms.com

 

[iapplelove]

Unfortunately, I don't think that will happen. Too many people are in love with Google, even though they know it is bad for them.

Im a heavy google services user. I don’t feel it’s bad for me. Been using Google services since the beginning and shockingly I’m still alive and well. And with kids.

 

[Rainshadow]

Hence misleading product name. A costly mistake.
Like selling a suit as bulletproof, except for certain bullets.

That is indeed how all bulletproof vests are sold. They only work for certain bullets. No joke. 😆 I Hope you knew that.

 

[ForkHandles]

Who are you quoting?

It originated in the early 70s re free to air television channels.
it first came to my attention later last year in a viral video about Facebook and how they profile each users absolute personality type and then sell that data on. I deleted my account which was incredibly easy by the way, change your age to 3 years old!