Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Google Ordered to Pay $314M for Misusing Android Users' Cellular Data Without Permission
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

Google Ordered to Pay $314M for Misusing Android Users' Cellular Data Without Permission

Tony40Tony40 Member

Google has been ordered by a court in the U.S. state of California to pay $314 million over charges that it misused Android device users' cellular data when they were idle to passively send information to the company.

The verdict marks an end to a legal class-action complaint that was originally filed in August 2019.

In their lawsuit, the plaintiffs argued that Google's Android operating system leverages users' cellular data to transmit a "variety of information to Google" without their permission, even when their devices are kept in an idle state.

"Although Google could make it so that these transfers happen only when the phones are connected to Wi-Fi, Google instead designed these transfers so they can also take place over a cellular network," they said.

https://thehackernews.com/2025/07/google-ordered-to-pay-314m-for-misusing.html

«1

Comments

  • edited July 4

    Good start, but not enough.

    Related note: makes sense why google is cracking down on AOSP, to make custom roms that circumvent the need for lawsuits like these at all more difficult to install and use.

  • LeviLevi Member

    Peanuts. First do - than apologise. It is cheaper.

    Thanked by 2beermachine itzgeo
  • Wow a lot of vcpu there.

  • jsgjsg Member, Resident Benchmarker

    Increase that sum ($314M) ten-fold ... and google might, just might feel as if a dime fell out of their purse ...

    "do no evil" - Hahahahaha!

  • artxsartxs Member

    why does cellular data matter more than regular data? windows 11 sends tons of information about you to microsoft in the background 24/7. windows defender sends all the apps that you install back to microsoft under the pretense that its all for your protection.

    Thanked by 2itzgeo eezcloud
  • zedzed Member

    @artxs said:
    why does cellular data matter more than regular data? windows 11 sends tons of information about you to microsoft in the background 24/7. windows defender sends all the apps that you install back to microsoft under the pretense that its all for your protection.

    i think you just made up this argument you're having.

  • artxsartxs Member

    @zed said:
    i think you just made up this argument you're having.

    install a firewall that tracks outbound traffic from windows and see for yourself. everything in windows "phone home." the entire OS is one giant spyware just like chrome, and what's amazing is that everything pivots around Excel and Outlook. Without those two applications used by enterprises everywhere, the entire windows ecosystem would collapse because pretty much every app out there is online and doesn't need windows.

  • @artxs said:
    why does cellular data matter more than regular data?

    Because cellular data is often paid for in buckets, not unlimited. So if a user thinks the option not to send data over cellular is off but it still is, that's a problem because they're paying for that privilege without their knowledge.

    I used to have like 2GB/month data plans where WiFi hotspots were necessary to keep under that limit each month. Then I switched to a 250GB plan and now IDGAF how much data Android uses over cellular.

  • zedzed Member

    @artxs said:

    @zed said:
    i think you just made up this argument you're having.

    install a firewall that tracks outbound traffic from windows and see for yourself. everything in windows "phone home." the entire OS is one giant spyware just like chrome, and what's amazing is that everything pivots around Excel and Outlook. Without those two applications used by enterprises everywhere, the entire windows ecosystem would collapse because pretty much every app out there is online and doesn't need windows.

    no man, i'm not disagreeing that windows is spyware, but nobody claimed otherwise. this is strictly about google getting a (minor, lets be real) fine.

  • artxsartxs Member

    @TimboJones said:
    Because cellular data is often paid for in buckets, not unlimited. So if a user thinks the option not to send data over cellular is off but it still is, that's a problem because they're paying for that privilege without their knowledge.

    It was naive to ever believe google would follow that, because it would implicitly mean Google doesn't track phones that never goes on wifi. No matter what the court says, google would always send data over cellular because no fine is big enough to subvert their entire business model of tracking people. If its not in android, they would send that tracking information in one of their apps (google maps) and no one would know about it.

    Thanked by 1itzgeo
  • eb1995eb1995 Member

    I heard a bit about this a while ago so I don’t use chrome or anything anymore. I don’t use androids either because it seems a year after purchase it just goes really slow whereas an iPhone just doesn’t do that.

    But I have turned off hey siri recently after reading that’s been listening too. Can’t win but can do my best lol

  • eezcloudeezcloud Member

    As an app developer, I'm not sure I like this. It's an expansive theory of product liability. Why don't we all sue lowendtalk because they could design this site to use less data, but didn't.

  • emghemgh Member, Megathread Squad

    @artxs said: windows defender sends all the apps that you install back to microsoft under the pretense that its all for your protection.

    let's be honest here, first windows defender was trash and everyone was complaining about it, then they started to collect more data and made it good, and now everyone is complaining about that, you can't have good detection with no data

    Thanked by 1tentor
  • @eb1995 said:
    I don’t use androids either because it seems a year after purchase it just goes really slow whereas an iPhone just doesn’t do that.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-67911517

  • artxsartxs Member

    @emgh said:
    let's be honest here, first windows defender was trash and everyone was complaining about it, then they started to collect more data and made it good, and now everyone is complaining about that, you can't have good detection with no data

    there's utterly no legitimate reason for microsoft to get into the antivirus space for free. you don't run a business for good will (they donated a lot of PCs to school so that kids learn to use windows at a young age instead of macos or linux. not because they care about kids computer literacy).

    microsoft needed a reason to track what apps you run on windows and your habits, and an antivirus is the perfect reason. the only thing that windows defender is extremely good at is catching keygens and activators for warez. thanks to windows defender, they know exactly how many PCs are using legitimate licenses and how many are pirated. They also know what apps are installed on windows to get marketable data. it's like amazon buying IMDB. it's to track the market to see which movies are popular in order to drive their Amazon Prime video. everything that doesn't make a profit exists to collect data.

    Thanked by 1Noct
  • DrvDrv Member

    too small fine.
    how about the root system apps from vendors that tracks your gps, listen to your mic or record 24/7. no permission to deny access to those.
    spyware/surveillance companies, i am amazed that europeans didnt ban apple, google, fb, cloudflare, etc.

  • cainyxuescainyxues Member

    When am I getting my part of the money? Since they profited from "my" data.....👀

  • DrvDrv Member

    @cainyxues said:
    When am I getting my part of the money? Since they profited from "my" data.....👀

    sue them, you from us?

  • cainyxuescainyxues Member

    @Drv said:

    @cainyxues said:
    When am I getting my part of the money? Since they profited from "my" data.....👀

    sue them, you from us?

    nope 😅

  • cainyxuescainyxues Member

    but I am pretty sure they do it everywhere

  • emghemgh Member, Megathread Squad

    @artxs said:

    @emgh said:
    let's be honest here, first windows defender was trash and everyone was complaining about it, then they started to collect more data and made it good, and now everyone is complaining about that, you can't have good detection with no data

    there's utterly no legitimate reason for microsoft to get into the antivirus space for free.

    No, you completely missed the point. The point is that they want Windows adoption to be high. And for it to be high, the OS has to be good, and for it to be good, it should be secure.

    If you can get the same protection without paying, the OS becomes better.

    Thanked by 1beermachine
  • DrvDrv Member

    @artxs said:
    why does cellular data matter more than regular data? windows 11 sends tons of information about you to microsoft in the background 24/7. windows defender sends all the apps that you install back to microsoft under the pretense that its all for your protection.

    Last time i checked,you can still make windows silent, no phone home. But, must be pro or enterprise versions.
    Dunno for 10 or 11, only tried in 8.1.

  • WebProjectWebProject Host Rep, Veteran
    edited July 5

    I am not surprised as their branded phone do log every user activity so can be used for the personalised ads

  • @Xrmaddness said:

    @eb1995 said:
    I don’t use androids either because it seems a year after purchase it just goes really slow whereas an iPhone just doesn’t do that.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-67911517

    Far from being the same...

  • jenkkijenkki Member

    So where is our money?

  • artxsartxs Member

    @emgh said:
    No, you completely missed the point. The point is that they want Windows adoption to be high. And for it to be high, the OS has to be good, and for it to be good, it should be secure.

    I think you missed my point. Nothing is secure on windows. Nothing runs on windows-- how many web sites run on IIS? IIS is dead. WSL is on windows because even Microsoft realizes that software development runs on linux. A great majority of windows run behind enterprise or home cable firewalls.

    If by "secure" you mean antivirus, by this logic Linux should be dead because it came with no antivirus. But people with a brain knows what to do.

  • DrvDrv Member
    edited July 5

    no os is secure and will never be.
    even if you could have bug free code, you have backdoored hardware, you cant build hardware by yourself.
    linux is popular because it is GRATIS, if windows was 0$ then you will have other story.

  • @artxs said:

    @emgh said:
    let's be honest here, first windows defender was trash and everyone was complaining about it, then they started to collect more data and made it good, and now everyone is complaining about that, you can't have good detection with no data

    there's utterly no legitimate reason for microsoft to get into the antivirus space for free. you don't run a business for good will (they donated a lot of PCs to school so that kids learn to use windows at a young age instead of macos or linux. not because they care about kids computer literacy).

    You must be young. Windows XP had 300 million pirated copies running in China not getting updates and became an Internet time bomb.

    As a result, each version of Windows after XP had better security, allowed updates to unlicensed Windows, and included a default antivirus program. They are well aware of the scale that infected machines have and their ability to cripple the internet.

    I know you're a young conspiracy nut, but do some goddamn research every now and again if you're going to keep reading those conspiracy theory shit sites and spreading FUD.

  • artxsartxs Member

    @TimboJones said:
    You must be young. Windows XP had 300 million pirated copies running in China not getting updates and became an Internet time bomb.

    Your point is what? Pirated Windows 11 copies in China are getting updates and they're secure? The words "piracy", "security" and "antivirus" got you all confused.. Antivirus and windows have nothing to do with each other. Like I said, linux doesn't have a built-in antivirus and there was no "internet time bomb."

    Thanked by 1Noct
  • emghemgh Member, Megathread Squad

    @artxs said:

    @TimboJones said:
    You must be young. Windows XP had 300 million pirated copies running in China not getting updates and became an Internet time bomb.

    Your point is what? Pirated Windows 11 copies in China are getting updates and they're secure? The words "piracy", "security" and "antivirus" got you all confused.. Antivirus and windows have nothing to do with each other. Like I said, linux doesn't have a built-in antivirus and there was no "internet time bomb."

    Difference being my grandmother doesn’t run Linux. Don’t see everything so binary, you’re losing the truth along the way.

Sign In or Register to comment.