A legal dispute over Google's practice of tracking users to create targeted advertisements ended Wednesday as a federal judge ruled in the company's favor.
A class action lawsuit, titled Google Inc. Cookie Placement Consumer Privacy Litigation, was brought by web browser users who alleged that Google avoided browser security settings, using cookies to track usage on computers and mobile devices. The plaintiffs alleged that the company wrongfully maneuvered its way through browser security. They further claimed that this tracking information informed Google's use of targeted ads.
The lawsuit, which also named online advertisers Vibrant Media and Media Innovation Group, was thrown out by a federal judge in Delaware on Wednesday. Judge Sue Robinson acknowledged the fact that the companies in question avoided browser security, tracking the users, but said the plaintiffs did not prove they suffered damage from this action.
In an official document reproduced by CNET, the judge explained the reasons for the decision. Chief among these is the argument that "the transfer of inputted information (which would have occurred regardless of Google's placement of cookies) does not rise to the level of a serious invasion of privacy or an egregious breach of social norms."
What do you think of the ruling? Tell us your opinion in the comments below.
A class action lawsuit, titled Google Inc. Cookie Placement Consumer Privacy Litigation, was brought by web browser users who alleged that Google avoided browser security settings, using cookies to track usage on computers and mobile devices. The plaintiffs alleged that the company wrongfully maneuvered its way through browser security. They further claimed that this tracking information informed Google's use of targeted ads.
The lawsuit, which also named online advertisers Vibrant Media and Media Innovation Group, was thrown out by a federal judge in Delaware on Wednesday. Judge Sue Robinson acknowledged the fact that the companies in question avoided browser security, tracking the users, but said the plaintiffs did not prove they suffered damage from this action.
In an official document reproduced by CNET, the judge explained the reasons for the decision. Chief among these is the argument that "the transfer of inputted information (which would have occurred regardless of Google's placement of cookies) does not rise to the level of a serious invasion of privacy or an egregious breach of social norms."
What do you think of the ruling? Tell us your opinion in the comments below.
0 comments:
Post a Comment