In early 2012, Google created a stir by rolling out a new privacy policy that covers many of its products. It was widely noted at the time – in the media, the blogosphere, and by Google itself– that the new policy permitted Google to combine the data it had collected from users of its various products (e.g., YouTube, search, and Gmail), rather than maintain that data in separate databases associated with each product. Class action lawsuits quickly followed.
Last week, a federal court in California dismissed one of these suits. The plaintiffs in the case, In re Google, Inc. Privacy Policy Litigation, C 12-01382 PSG (N.D. Cal.; Dec. 28, 2012), had alleged that Google's consolidation of its privacy policies violated the federal Wiretap Act as well as a number of California statutes and common law privacy and contract principles.
The Court found that, while the Plaintiffs had "raised serious questions regarding Google's respect for consumers' privacy," they lacked Article III standing because they failed to allege facts that demonstrate that they had suffered any "injury in fact." Specifically, the Court rejected the Plaintiffs' argument that Android phone users would suffer the cost of a replacement phone because no evidence was provided to demonstrate that any Plaintiff actually purchased a new phone. Moreover, according to the Court's order, no other specific harm was identified in the Plaintiffs' complaint that would result from Google's consolidation of its privacy policies, and the Court rejected the notion that unauthorized disclosure of personal information (in this instance, by Google to itself) is an injury in and of itself. Accordingly, the Court dismissed the case, providing the Platintiffs with leave until January 31, 2013 to amend the complaint.
This article first appeared in Cyberlaw Currents, a Frankfurt Kurnit legal blog.
This alert provides general coverage of its subject area. We provide it with the understanding that Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz is not engaged herein in rendering legal advice, and shall not be liable for any damages resulting from any error, inaccuracy, or omission. Our attorneys practice law only in jurisdictions in which they are properly authorized to do so. We do not seek to represent clients in other jurisdictions.
