UK court blocks iPhone users' privacy case against Google

[Jamie McKane]

UK court blocks iPhone users' privacy case against Google

A U.K. lawsuit filed against Google by millions of iPhone users over data-collection claims was thrown out by a London judge.

The group, known as Google You Owe Us, were seeking as much as 3.2 billion pounds ($4.2 billion), according to documents filed with the court in May. The organization, which represents more than 4 million people, said the Alphabet Inc. unit unlawfully gathered personal information by bypassing Apple Inc.’s iPhone default privacy settings.

[Bloomberg]

 

[Thor]

Good move.

Google's AI will be the downfall of humankind.

 

[sajunky]

Rejected on technicality: "Not all customer share mutual interest". It is either a judge protect an interest of people who "are quite happy to have their personal information collected online, and to receive advertising or marketing as a result" or a judge is contradicting itself. Not sure how interpret this ruling, but something is wrong in a judge comment . I am sure a good lawyer will pick it up.

 

[ToxicBunny]

Hardly a technicality my son... It's a fundamental thing... But all that was done was a rejection of the larger joined case.. Nothing stops every one of those susposed 4m members suing Google individually

 

[sajunky]

Hardly a technicality my son... It's a fundamental thing... But all that was done was a rejection of the larger joined case.. Nothing stops every one of those susposed 4m members suing Google individually

Fundamental thing, but a judge comment contradicts with a verdict.

 

[ToxicBunny]

Fundamental thing, but a judge comment contradicts with a verdict.

Contradicts how?

Mind explaining that to the rest of us?

 

[sajunky]

Contradicts how?

Mind explaining that to the rest of us?

You didn't chose to point it out in response to my first post, so now it looks like a troll.

 

[ToxicBunny]

You didn't chose to point it out in response to my first post, so now it looks like a troll.

Ok, lets be very simple about this...

You claim it was a technicality, and that the judge contradicts himself.

Explain just those two things please.

If you can't, just apologise, admit that it is beyond your understanding and we will all be happy and move on.