Following an investigation into Google’s location tracking practices, 16 states have reached an agreement with the tech giant regarding how it will handle user data in the future. In total, Google will pay out $8.5 million to the states and will implement new privacy policies designed to protect user data and limit how Google collects such information in the future. [read more]
Attorney General of Oregon Ellen Rosenblum stated on Monday that Google has reached a $391.5 million settlement with 40 states regarding its use of location tracking.
Google continued to gather information about users’ movements even after consumers believed they had disabled location tracking in their account settings, according to Oregon’s AG office. Beginning in 2023, Google must comply with the settlement’s demands for more user transparency and more precise location tracking disclosures.
Together with Doug Peterson, the Nebraska attorney general, Rosenblum oversaw the settlement. According to the press release, it is the biggest consumer privacy settlement ever led by a consortium of attorneys general.
We have resolved this inquiry, which was founded on out-of-date product policies that we revised years ago, according to enhancements we’ve made recently, said Google spokesperson José Castaeda in a statement.
The foundation for the probe was made public in a 2018 Associated Press story.
In the statement, Rosenblum stated that “Google has put business over its consumers’ privacy for years.” They have been cunning and dishonest. Although users believed they had turned off Google’s location monitoring tools, the search giant stealthily tracked their every move and shared that data with advertising.
Google has been sued for location monitoring in Washington, D.C., Indiana, Texas, and Washington state in addition to Arizona, where a similar lawsuit was resolved for $85 million last month. According to the four AGs, Google used the location data for its advertising business. The cases seek the court to order Google to give up any algorithms it developed using the allegedly illegally obtained advantages along with any financial gains.
