A federal judge rejected Google’s proposed class-action settlement with non-Gmail users who said it illegally scanned their emails to Gmail users to create targeted advertising on March 16.In a decision on Wednesday night, U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, California, said it was unclear that the accord, which provided no money for plaintiffs but up to $2.2 million in fees and expenses for their lawyers, would ensure Google’s compliance with federal and state privacy laws.Koh called the proposed disclosure notice inadequate. She said this was because it did not clearly reveal any technical changes that Google would make, or that Google scans non-Gmail users’ emails to create ads for Gmail users.The judge also said the notice did not make clear that Google could still extract data for the “dual purpose” of creating targeted ads and detecting spam and malware, and then use that data once emails went into storage after being transmitted.”In sum, based on the parties’ current filings, the court cannot conclude that the settlement is fundamentally fair, adequate, and reasonable,” Koh wrote.Google, a unit of Mountain View, California-based Alphabet Inc, declined to comment.Koh distinguished the settlement from a similar accord with Yahoo Inc that she said required more disclosures.Michael Sobol, a partner at Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein representing the plaintiffs, in an interview said, “we will press on with the litigation, while exploring opportunities for a resolution consistent with the court’s decision.” He said this could include an end to the challenged scanning.The named plaintiffs, Daniel Matera of New York and Susan Rashkis of San Francisco, had accused Google of violating the federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act and California Invasion of Privacy Act through its scanning practices.Koh ruled six days after Google won preliminary approval from a different judge in her court of a separate $22.5 million settlement with businesses over internet ad placements.In that case, known as Google AdWords Litigation, businesses accused Google of placing their ads in obscure places such as error pages and undeveloped websites known as parked domains, causing them to overpay for the placements.The case is Matera v Google Inc, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, No. 15-04062.
WASHINGTON President Donald Trump’s administration is proposing a 31 percent cut to the Environmental Protection Agency’s budget, eliminating its climate change programs and trimming back core initiatives aimed at protecting air and water quality, […]
SEATTLE – Inside the control tower at John F. Kennedy International Airport, air traffic controllers can track planes traveling hundreds of miles away.But when it’s time for a controller to hand off responsibility for watching […]
NEW YORK Getting financial advice on complicated insurance products is, well, complicated.Most life insurance with investment options, long-term care insurance and annuity products come with a dizzying array of options and many pages of […]