A judge is “disturbed” by the finding that users who browse in private mode are even tracked.
When Google users browse incognito, how hidden is their activity?
The Alphabet Inc. unit says turning on invisible mode in Chrome or “private browsing” in other browsers means your business won’t “remember your activity.” But a judge with a background for having commissioned the Silicon Valley giants over their data collection raised questions Thursday about whether Google is as forthright as it needs to be about the personal information it is collecting from users.
At a hearing Thursday in San Jose, California, U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh said she was “concerned” by Google’s data collection practices, as described in a class action lawsuit that says that the company’s private browsing promises are a “deception”. The lawsuit seeks damages of $ 5,000 for each of the millions of people whose privacy has been compromised since June 2016.
Suspending Google’s attempt to dismiss the lawsuit, Koh said he finds it “unusual” for the company to make the “extra effort” of collecting data if it doesn’t use the information to create user profiles or targeted advertising.
Google has become a target of antitrust lawsuits over the past year filed by state and federal officials, as well as companies, accusing it of abusing its domain in digital advertising and online search. Koh has a deeper history with the company as a vocal critic of its privacy policies. It forced Google in a notable case to reveal its email scan to create profiles and target advertising.
In this case, Google is accused of relying on pieces of its code within websites that use its analytics and advertising services to scrape users’ supposedly private browsing history and send copies to Google’s servers. .
Google makes it look like private browsing mode gives users more control over their data, said Amanda Bonn, a lawyer who represents users, in Koh. Actually, “Google says you can basically do very little to prevent us from collecting your data, and that’s what you should assume we’re doing,” Bonn said.
Dissemination of the company
Google argues that whenever people use Chrome’s private browsing mode, a full-page alert makes it clear that other people using the device won’t see their activity, but that it may still be visible, the websites you visit and your internet service provider.
Google attorney Andrew Schapiro said the company’s privacy policy “expressly discloses” its practices. “The data collection in question is disclosed,” he said.
Another Google attorney, Stephen Broome, said website owners who contract with the company to use their analytics services or other services are well aware of the data collection described in the lawsuit.
Broome’s attempt to minimize privacy concerns by pointing out that the federal court system’s own website uses Google’s services ended up counterproductive.
The judge demanded an explanation “about what exactly Google is doing,” while expressing concern that visitors to the court’s website unwittingly disclose information to the company.
“I want a statement from Google about the information they collect from users on the court’s website and what it is for,” Koh told the company’s lawyers.
The case is Brown v. Google, 20-cv-03664, U.S. District Court, Northern California District (San Jose).