\n<\/p>\n
On Monday, a California judge denied<\/a> Google\u2019s request for summary judgment in a lawsuit filed by users alleging the company illegally invaded the privacy of millions of people<\/a>. The people suing Google say that occurred because Google\u2019s cookies, analytics, and tools in apps continued to track internet browsing activity even after users activated Incognito mode Chrome, or other similar features like Safari\u2019s private browsing expecting a certain level of privacy. However, the truth is, as we wrote in 2018<\/a>, \u201cWhat isn\u2019t private: private browsing mode.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Judge Yvonne Gonzalez-Rogers pointed to statements in the Chrome privacy notice, Privacy Policy, Incognito Splash Screen, and Search & Browse Privately Help page about how incognito mode limits the information stored or how people can control the information they share, writing, \u201cTaken as a whole, a triable issue exists as to whether these writings created an enforceable promise that Google would not collect users\u2019 data while they browsed privately.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n In response to the ruling, Google spokesperson Jos\u00e9 Casta\u00f1eda provided the following statement to The Verge<\/em>:<\/p>\n<\/div>\n \u201cWe strongly dispute these claims and we will defend ourselves vigorously against them. Incognito mode in Chrome gives you the choice to browse the internet without your activity being saved to your browser or device. As we clearly state each time you open a new incognito tab, websites might be able to collect information about your browsing activity during your session.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Another issue going against Google\u2019s arguments that the judge mentioned is that the plaintiffs have evidence Google \u201cstores users\u2019 regular and private browsing data in the same logs; it uses those mixed logs to send users personalized ads; and, even if the individual data points gathered are anonymous by themselves, when aggregated, Google can use them to \u2018uniquely identify a user with a high probability of success.\u2019\u201d <\/p>\n<\/div>\n She also responded to a Google argument that the plaintiffs didn\u2019t suffer economic injury, writing that \u201cPlaintiffs have shown that there is a market for their browsing data and Google\u2019s alleged surreptitious collection of the data inhibited plaintiffs\u2019 ability to participate in that market… Finally, given the nature of Google\u2019s data collection, the Court is satisfied that money damages alone are not an adequate remedy. Injunctive relief is necessary to address Google\u2019s ongoing collection of users\u2019 private browsing data.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n The lawsuit was filed in 2020, seeking \u201cat least\u201d $5 billion in damages, and as reported by Mike Swift for MLex<\/a>, the ruling was not entirely surprising, as the judge had indicated she\u2019d do so, but it is a big one as it moves the case closer toward settlement or a trial.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Update August 7th, 11:23PM ET:<\/strong> Added statement from Google.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n