Google hit with $314m fine for collecting data from idle Android phones without permission
Technology
62
Beiträge
49
Kommentatoren
0
Aufrufe
-
If you earn like 100k a year its like being slapped with a 300 $ fine just to put it into perspective.
100k AFTER all your expenses.
-
Because all the "slap on the wrist" fines have worked so well to modify corporate rapism...
/sYeah I'd agree that there is a lack of enforcement in some aspects but moreso a lack of regulation and legislation in others.
There needs to be a better commitment to addressing trends in capitalism than reacting to their overstepping.
-
They'll likely appeal.
True, the economy is saved!!
-
Alt text: a screenshot from final fantasy tactics with a character saying: “If the penalty for a crime is a fine, then that law only
exists for the lower class.”That's actually shopped. The game's writer said he wishes he wrote that line, though.
-
Yeah I'd agree that there is a lack of enforcement in some aspects but moreso a lack of regulation and legislation in others.
There needs to be a better commitment to addressing trends in capitalism than reacting to their overstepping.
I'm 70 years old and that still hasn't happened.
Bring back the guillotine, I say. Anything less is just the price of a permit. -
Assuming the fine isn't progressive, of course.
Over here in Finland fines for any but the minor offences are defined in percents of income, not in fixed sums of money. There have been cases of traffic fines of several hundreds of thousands for going 30 km/h over the speed limit. That makes them a punishment for very richest people as well, not only for the lower class.
Except capital income can be hidden in other countries, still giving an unfair advantage to the super rich.
-
True, the economy is saved!!
They already argued once in court that this was detailed in the TOS. Dunno if the appeal will do anything, but Google isn't exactly hurting for the money.
-
Google in 2024: Net profit: $100 billion
The government: "here is a tiny fine that you can't even see in a microscope."
I agree, but one thing that people always miss with these kinds of rulings is that they generally come with increased oversight and greater fines for repeat offenses. They're more likely to be caught if they try it again, and it'll grow until it actually hurts.
Still, this should be a lot larger. They should be trying to dissuade first-time offenses as well, not letting them take advantage of the system for profit because it won't hurt much when they're found out.
-
The linked Reuters article provides a bit more context:
The jury agreed with the plaintiffs that Alphabet's Google (GOOGL.O), was liable for sending and receiving information from the devices without permission while they were idle, causing what the lawsuit had called "mandatory and unavoidable burdens shouldered by Android device users for Google's benefit."
[…]
Google spokesperson Jose Castaneda said in a statement that the company would appeal, and that the verdict "misunderstands services that are critical to the security, performance, and reliability of Android devices."
opens new tab
the verdict "misunderstands services that are critical to the security, performance, and reliability of Android devices."
Ummmm maybe I’m misunderstanding but how on earth is opening a new tab critical to security and performance?
-
This post did not contain any content.
Google hit with $314m fine for collecting data from idle Android phones without permission
Google has been ordered to pay $314.6 million to Android phone users in California for collecting data from idle phones.
Android Authority (www.androidauthority.com)
A fine is the cost of doing business. Unless something changes they’ll keep doing it.
-
Yeah I'd agree that there is a lack of enforcement in some aspects but moreso a lack of regulation and legislation in others.
There needs to be a better commitment to addressing trends in capitalism than reacting to their overstepping.
These fines worked in 1957.
They don't work today.
Its not an overreach to increase fines to a relative point commiserate with current earnings, so that they can actually harm a company and by doing so discourage future illicit behavior.
To try and claim otherwise is some corpo rat bullshit.
These fines come on the heels of willful behavior, that they believe they can make money off of even accounting for the fines.. Which turns the fine into nothing more than a tax. With higher fines, that can destroy their profits and damage their company, they won't be so eager to pencil evil into the expense line.
-
opens new tab
the verdict "misunderstands services that are critical to the security, performance, and reliability of Android devices."
Ummmm maybe I’m misunderstanding but how on earth is opening a new tab critical to security and performance?
I think that's just part of the label of a link to Google's stock ticker
-
A fine is the cost of doing business. Unless something changes they’ll keep doing it.
It's just the government's cut since they don't pay much in taxes.
-
laughs in GrapheneOS
cries in cheap phone that doesn't flash GrapheneOS
-
It's just the government's cut since they don't pay much in taxes.
And it isn't like the victims see any of it
-
I agree, but one thing that people always miss with these kinds of rulings is that they generally come with increased oversight and greater fines for repeat offenses. They're more likely to be caught if they try it again, and it'll grow until it actually hurts.
Still, this should be a lot larger. They should be trying to dissuade first-time offenses as well, not letting them take advantage of the system for profit because it won't hurt much when they're found out.
In theory, yes, but governments won't do that. They worry that corporations would leave their states and they lose on employment and tax revenue. That's why they fine them very carefully to begin with.
-
In theory, yes, but governments won't do that. They worry that corporations would leave their states and they lose on employment and tax revenue. That's why they fine them very carefully to begin with.
If you're talking about the first paragraph, then no, that's literally what they do.
-
I think that's just part of the label of a link to Google's stock ticker
Yes, indeed this was just a copy error. Thanks for pointing it out.
