US Judge Awards $147 Million in Legal Fees After Google Privacy Verdict
- A federal court in San Francisco has awarded nearly $147 million in legal fees to plaintiffs' attorneys following a major privacy lawsuit against Google LLC.
- The legal proceedings involve the case titled Anibal Rodriguez et al v.
- During the proceedings, Google defended its data practices by asserting that the information gathered was non-personal, pseudonymized, and stored in separate, secure, and encrypted locations.
A federal court in San Francisco has awarded nearly $147 million in legal fees to plaintiffs’ attorneys following a major privacy lawsuit against Google LLC. The fee award stems from an ongoing class-action litigation involving user privacy practices and data collection across millions of mobile devices.
The Privacy Litigation Background
The legal proceedings involve the case titled Anibal Rodriguez et al v. Google LLC et al, carrying case number 3:20-cv-04688 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The jury found that the tech company violated confidentiality assurances tied to its “Web & App Activity” setting, which the plaintiffs characterized as a systematic deception regarding user privacy controls. The central technical mechanism at issue in the litigation involved Google’s Firebase SDK, described in court documents as a suite of software tools designed to add functionality to applications, particularly on Android. Plaintiffs argued that the software allowed Google to intercept and collect user app activity data without consent, even when individuals followed recommendations to disable tracking. The data collection allegedly spanned an eight-year period and impacted popular third-party applications including Lyft, Venmo, Shazam, The New York Times, and Duolingo.
Legal Defenses and Court Rulings
During the proceedings, Google defended its data practices by asserting that the information gathered was non-personal, pseudonymized, and stored in separate, secure, and encrypted locations. The company argued that the data was not associated with individual user accounts or identities and maintained that disabling the Web & App Activity setting was not designed to completely halt all data collection. While the eight-person federal jury concluded that Google was responsible for two of the three privacy violation counts presented by the plaintiffs, it also determined that the company did not act with malice. Consequently, the jury did not award punitive damages against the tech firm, leaving the financial disputes centered on compensatory liabilities and associated legal costs. Chief Judge Richard Seeborg previously issued pretrial rulings governing expert testimony and the evaluation of actual damages presented by economic experts in the case.
