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
Maybe those same old people do NOT have a lack of understanding of the definition of the term “Incognito” though?
I guess many are too young & tech savvy to have an expanded vocabulary… but in short, it means: “to have one’s identity obfuscated or hidden”, you know… as opposed to “to be followed and tracked by others”.
🤷♂️
Some people just need normal privacy, not apple privacy (stuff like hiding your cars license plate like Steve Jobs did or wanting to hide in the "closet").
With "privacy" being the latest tech hot potato, I wonder if anyone is monitoring code changes that Microsoft or Brave (and others) make to the Chrome code base to this effect. Would be interesting to see these in context (ie: git diffs, commentary, etc). Someone is tracking these changes.
EULA's are a gray area - they always have been. "We reserve the right to change this agreement.." [sic] blah blah. The reality of the matter is that these data frequently cross lines into uses that we don't agree to. Once your data is out there, there's not much you can do about it. The "politically correct" way of handling this is through law, discourse, agreement (or not), etc.
In general, and regardless of these EULAs that are inherently designed as exploitative (IMHO), I think it's important to continue holding companies like Google accountable. They hate it, but it's a powerful mechanism. I don't agree with the sentiment that "you use their products so they have the right to exploit you".
EULA's are a gray area - they always have been. "We reserve the right to change this agreement.." [sic] blah blah. The reality of the matter is that these data frequently cross lines into uses that we don't agree to. Once your data is out there, there's not much you can do about it. The "politically correct" way of handling this is through law, discourse, agreement (or not), etc.
In general, and regardless of these EULAs that are inherently designed as exploitative (IMHO), I think it's important to continue holding companies like Google accountable. They hate it, but it's a powerful mechanism. I don't agree with the sentiment that "you use their products so they have the right to exploit you".
An individual’s license plate does not necessarily reflect anything about their employer.
You don't need an expanded vocabulary to read and understand the information on the incognito mode splash page. It details clearly what "Incognito Mode" entails. Literally no excuse to claim "unaware of tracking" in incognito mode.
Only if it turns out that Google somehow links “incognito” usage to a non-incognito google (internal) profile, than I guess they have something to worry about as it is totally misleading..
The page tells you the limitations of the feature. “But my Apple TV isn’t actually giving me TV” “but my AirPort doesn’t take me flying anywhere”
If the entire argument is “b-but the plaintiff is stupid your honour” then prepare to get laughed out of court
That's fine but your soundbite has two sides.
Even if you are paying for it, you can still be a product in the overall package.
The explainer for Incognito Mode covers the entire page. There is no fine print. Super duper small font either. It's actually super duper ginormous font. Now that may not be in keeping with the narrative you've built, but hey, it is what it be.
I am not a lawyer…
However, I do seem to remember “implied warranty” from my business classes.
Basically- you can expect a toaster to toast, even if nowhere on the box or in the manual it guarantees that; & you are covered from a consumer standpoint, as the function was implied in the name.
In my mind, something called incognito, similarly should follow its definition and hide your identity, rather than continue to personally track you.
We’ll see what the court thinks, but to me- there’s some culpability on the part of Google.
Naming something a common name with a common definition & hiding in the EULA that it actually does no such thing seems intentionally misleading at best.
My understanding is that is why they are being sued. An average person would reasonably assume the feature does things. It’s up to Google to prove that they were clear regarding what the feature does. If their description was buried in jargon or legal terms than a jury is going to have a hard time believing people understood what was happening. And buried doesn’t mean fine print, but rather confusing terminology. If a jury defines incognito differently than Google than Google will have to convince the jury their use of the word is reasonable.
The page itself says that incognito can’t stop sites from tracking you. Game over, thanks for playing lmao
I don’t see where it clearly states that 3rd parties may still be cataloguing and tracking you… which part of this clearly states that to you?!
Your activity “might” still be visible to websites you visit… seems about as close as they get- but that is neither clear, nor the whole picture.
Aren’t they claiming in the article that you’re being tracked on the websites you visit by other websites/apps that you are NOT visiting in incognito?
It certainly doesn’t intimate that in any way, shape, or form.
The politically correct way of dealing with it is to assign monetary value to data and holding parties who release the data financially responsible for exposure. They should be held accountable for the number of people who could access it, not just those that did. (Just like how we are charged for being able to access subscriptions, and not if we do). Inappropriate data handling should put a company like google at risk of bankruptcy.
No. They want to do that. It isn’t necessarily their right. If an average person assumes they declined google permission to do that than they should avoid the behavior. Incognito mode may have, though the name of the feature, suggested they were not collecting data.
I really hope this gets to a jury.
Crazy that a judge is letting this lawsuit stand, as the article states!!!! You seem to see it MUCH more cut and dry than mister silly old judge. =)
I guess Google should hire @Suckfest 9001 to show up, declare loudly “game over!”, thank them for playing, then laugh his ass off at the court… lol.
Im not going to deny my ignorance in the subject but since reading this article i felt woke and decided to download Opera and Waterfox and give them a shot, it just feels uncomfortable that someone out there knows too much about me, i get that its the norm now but i think for me i just needed one more push and this article just did so... like the old Dominican saying says "You put the lock on after yo've already been robbed" ill try not to give them more from now on.
You are delusional if you think that will happenHope Google get shut down cos of this. People should switch to Safari
Yikes the sheer condescension is overbearing. Guess it’s true that when folks run out of arguments they go for personal attacks. Hope you feel better soon champ.
Excuse me? What’s this about old people? I’ll have you know I was ignorant even when I was 25! 😆
I thought it was pretty obvious that incognito means it does not get recorded in your browser’s history. I’m not aware of Google ever claiming that it’s an ad blocker or a VPN.
3rd parties: websites, employers/school, your ISP. It says might because not all websites track. What whole picture?
No, they aren't claiming in the article that you're being tracked cross site.
The claim is people are being secretly tracked while in Incognito Mode. They aren't imo. The splash page clearly tells you Incognito Mode is used so other people using the same device won't see your activity. It also clearly tells you what other entities that can see your activity while using Incognito Mode. Additionally, it offers a link to more detailed information if someone still isn't clear.
Reading that splash page and assuming any level of privacy beyond another user on that particular device is not a reasonable assumption imo. It's obvious you could still be tracked. There's nothing secret about it.
Not saying it’s not good to have these epiphanies, but internet privacy is in itself an oxymoron. If you look at how the internet works, you’re putting your trust on a lot of 3rd parties (browsers, ISPs, apps, govts, etc) on how they handle your data.