Quote Origin: You’re Not the Customer; You’re the Product – Quote Investigator®
quoteinvestigator.com
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Judge Rules Google Must Face Lawsuit Alleging Chrome Tracks Users in Incognito Mode
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
quoteinvestigator.com
5 billions in damages? And that's only for the US users? Wait until users in EU join the choir. I bet they will defend Google "vigorously", or there won't be a Google to defend anymore after this.
Yea, but I thought it was more of a UK thing where Hoover became a synonym for vacuum. It appears the US slang is more along the lines of Bogarting...
Yea, I just thought it odd it has crossed the ocean in the same context.
It apparently has a second meaning as well:
Being manipulated back into a relationship against your will with threats of suicide or self-harm, threats of harm to others or property, or threats of false criminal accusations. A “hoover” is relationship blackmail. This slang term is often associated with individuals suffering from personality disorders like Borderline Personality Disorder or Narcissistic Personality Disorder.
The incognito page itself literally says it can’t stop sites from tracking you. This case is spawned from old people who possess a lack of understanding of technology and it will get thrown out.
As much as I hate tracking, this lawsuit is stupid. Google has done enough to make people aware that they are not completely invisible from the world in incognito. Do people expect Google to put a banner in Chrome that says, "Hey remember we are still tracking you in the incognito mode, click here to learn more"?
I imagine this lawsuit would apply to Safari as well if it had a larger user base.
“Private Browsing protects your private information and blocks some websites from tracking your search behavior. Safari won't remember the pages you visit, your search history, or your AutoFill information.”
Of course with all things technical and legal, the devil (or angel) is in the details 🤣
“Private Browsing protects your private information and blocks some websites from tracking your search behavior. Safari won't remember the pages you visit, your search history, or your AutoFill information.”
Of course with all things technical and legal, the devil (or angel) is in the details 🤣
You're not paying for Safari and it isn't completely private in private mode so it behaves the same way.
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT203036#:~:text=When you use Private Browsing,history, or your AutoFill information.
For comparison, Google is much more open and descriptive about incognito browsing browsing.
https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/7440301?co=GENIE.Platform=Android&hl=en
Also, common sense says that cookies still function in private browsing/incognito mode otherwise you won't be able to log into web sites but cookies, browsing data, etc. are not saved upon exiting private browsing/incognito mode. A simple Google search also explains this so blind assumption doesn't make someone else liable.
Who's complaining anyway, pedophiles and porn surfers? Little did they know that web sites and ISPs log their usage so nothing about the internet is private.
https://www.juniper.net/documentati...-flow-tap/lawful-intercept-using-flow-tap.pdf
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/do...guides/lawful_intercept/10LIovr.html#wp998206
Last edited:
Apple doesn't release Safari for Windows any more and no version for Android either.Hope Google get shut down cos of this. People should switch to Safari
So Incognito mode is just ******** then?
Never trust Google
"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,"
Never trust Google
"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,"
That is indeed how all bulletproof vests are sold. They only work for certain bullets. No joke.I Hope you knew that.
I Hope you knew that.
Of course you’re right. I should have used a better example. Let’s take a best claimed to be indestructible (except for when it isn’t).
Google needs to go. What purpose does it serve society other than copying apple and stealing data?
Quote Origin: You’re Not the Customer; You’re the Product – Quote Investigator®
Thanks! Appreciate the context.
If they did there would be some fine print
<super duper small font obfuscated in legalize that the guy from Suits couldn't decipher>
By clicking in this banner, you wave all previous privacy rights and opt into all Google data collection regardless of other choices. You voluntarily submit to google collecting and selling any data they want from you down to and including sending corporate agents to do a body cavity search.
Furthermore, but NOT clicking on this banner, you agree to the same.
</super duper small font obfuscated in legalize that the guy from Suits couldn't decipher>
I mean these are the same guys that allege Apple is being unfair by trying to protect you from tracking, however much they can.
Also, to the guy who says you do not pay for Safari, you do. It is bundled with the price of the Mac - just like Garage band, Pages, and OS X.
Also more directly used in:
Last edited:
People should get a refund then since Safari is broken. Would gladly pay for Chrome if I had to otherwise my MBA M1 is useless for basic browsing.
Look at this rubbish that can't scroll all the way down a web page, has choppy scrolling and lots of other issues.
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/scrolling-and-ui-choppy-on-m1-macbook-air.2271003/post-29579599
That's a bit of an exaggeration, no? They don't "Steal" data. You agree to all the data they collect, and to allow Google to use it in pretty much any way they see fit when you click the install button. It's just that nobody reads the legal text when they download and hit that install button.
That being said, I think these tech/software companies don't do enough to make it clear exactly WHAT data they are collecting, HOW OFTEN, and WHAT IT MEANS... in plain English. "Share with partners" doesn't equate to what they actually do with your data for most people.
In the end, though, I believe it's up to the user to do enough research to understand what they're doing and what they're in for when they use a product. To me, much (not all) of this is like filing suit against an automaker because a loved one dies in a car accident; claiming the automaker didn't clearly explain every possible scenario of using the car, including a car accident resulting in death.
In 2021, it should not be news to anyone using a computer/smartphone that you are being tracked everywhere, ALL your personal information is being collected, and it's highly likely that it will be sold in one fashion or another.
I'm not saying I'm happy with this, or that we should accept it. But these lawsuits are completely ridiculous and do nothing to change things, other than convincing these companies to come up with even more clever ways to hide what they're doing.
Google got caught doing this ..again? Google would be nothing, if there weren't so many people willing to support the surveillance state.
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
I maybe comparable to an advertiser or company providing a free basket of samples and a book of coupons and accustoming behaviour to those brands. Not getting addicted enough, send out more appealing offers.