Lawsuit accuses Google of tracking users in Incognito mode

The proposed class action lawsuit is seeking $5 billion in
damages.

https://www.engadget.com/google-lawsuit-tracking-users-
incognito-mode-134515384.html

The proposed class action lawsuit is seeking $5 billion in
damages.

https://www.engadget.com/google-lawsuit-tracking-users-incognito-mode-13454515384.html

Thanks - 404 Not Found

wrote

| The proposed class action lawsuit is seeking $5 billion in
| damages.
|
|
https://www.engadget.com/google-lawsuit-tracking-users-incognito-mode-13454515384.html
|
| Thanks - 404 Not Found
|

There was a typo. You could have found the right link
in the time it took you to complain:

https://www.engadget.com/google-laws...134515384.html

There are also lots of other sources. I think I saw it
on Slashdot first. It's an interesting case because the
suit(s) is over Google tracking with their spyware web
beacons in Chrome when people are using so-called
incognito mode. It nicely highlights Google's ubiquitous
spyware system.

Maps, jquery, fonts, website statistics via Google
analytics, recaptcha.... Those are some of the things
Google gives away free to webmasters who are incompetent,
care nothing about their visitors' privacy, or both.

That's not even counting the numerous spyware items
used as part of their ad network, such as Googletagmanager;
as well as youtube and Google docs and gmail. Google
is masterful at giving away trinkets that work really
well and using those as spyware to prfit by datamining
and ads.

What the lawsuit is rightly pointing out is that Google
have been telling Chrome users that incognito mode gives
them privacy, while google iself is spying on them. I don't
know if they have a chance of winning, but it's a clever angle
that highlights Google's brazen disregard for common decency.

In article , Mayayana
wrote:


What the lawsuit is rightly pointing out is that Google
have been telling Chrome users that incognito mode gives
them privacy, while google iself is spying on them.

google has never told anyone that, since that's not what incognito mode
does.

what google did tell people is that your activity is still visible to
sites you visit (e.g., google) and your isp:
https://zdnet2.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/...6d5-4f58-8093-
2e5c20124e12/google-chrome-incognito.png

I don't
know if they have a chance of winning, but it's a clever angle
that highlights Google's brazen disregard for common decency.

they have zero chance of winning since they clearly disclosed ahead of
time what incognito mode does and does not do.

however, they will probably settle out of court for less than a trial
would cost, a common legal tactic by sleazy lawyers.

wrote


The proposed class action lawsuit is seeking $5 billion in
damages.

https://www.engadget.com/google-lawsuit-tracking-users-incognito-mode-13454515384.html

Thanks - 404 Not Found


There was a typo. You could have found the right link
in the time it took you to complain:


Yeah, that was real easy to see.
Instead of 13454515384.html
it was 134515384.html

Am 04.06.20 um 15:22 schrieb nospam:
In article , Mayayana
wrote:


What the lawsuit is rightly pointing out is that Google
have been telling Chrome users that incognito mode gives
them privacy, while google iself is spying on them.

google has never told anyone that, since that's not what incognito mode
does.

The really bad thing is that they never asked for consent. Inkognito is
kindergarten crap.
With the exception of Mozilla all browser-developpers should be sued as
well for not preventing such crimninal behaviour.

what google did tell people is that your activity is still visible to
sites you visit (e.g., google) and your isp:
https://zdnet2.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/...6d5-4f58-8093-
2e5c20124e12/google-chrome-incognito.png

I don't
know if they have a chance of winning, but it's a clever angle
that highlights Google's brazen disregard for common decency.

they have zero chance of winning since they clearly disclosed ahead of
time what incognito mode does and does not do.

That is only a minor part of the complaint.

however, they will probably settle out of court for less than a trial
would cost, a common legal tactic by sleazy lawyers.

It is more clever to keep Google and others like Facebook, Instagram and
Twitter out by using the right tools and not buying Android and other
Google-OS-based devices.

Typical American story: First allow everything and after decades someone
finds out "oh my God what did we do and allow?" and then shoot with the
heavy artillery ...

Joerg Lorenz writes:

Am 04.06.20 um 15:22 schrieb nospam:
In article , Mayayana
wrote:


What the lawsuit is rightly pointing out is that Google
have been telling Chrome users that incognito mode gives
them privacy, while google iself is spying on them.

google has never told anyone that, since that's not what incognito mode
does.

The really bad thing is that they never asked for consent. Inkognito is
kindergarten crap.
With the exception of Mozilla all browser-developpers should be sued as
well for not preventing such crimninal behaviour.

Chromium is an exception, too. It have almost no market share, though.

what google did tell people is that your activity is still visible to
sites you visit (e.g., google) and your isp:
https://zdnet2.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/...6d5-4f58-8093-
2e5c20124e12/google-chrome-incognito.png

I don't
know if they have a chance of winning, but it's a clever angle
that highlights Google's brazen disregard for common decency.

they have zero chance of winning since they clearly disclosed ahead of
time what incognito mode does and does not do.

That is only a minor part of the complaint.

however, they will probably settle out of court for less than a trial
would cost, a common legal tactic by sleazy lawyers.

It is more clever to keep Google and others like Facebook, Instagram and
Twitter out by using the right tools and not buying Android and other
Google-OS-based devices.

Typical American story: First allow everything and after decades someone
finds out "oh my God what did we do and allow?" and then shoot with the
heavy artillery ...

Typical American story: First allow everything and after decades someone
finds out "oh my God what did we do and allow?" and then shoot with the
heavy artillery ...

You European *******s are so much smarter than that.
You introduce a bunch of Allah false god dirty Arab
worshipers into you country who think salvation comes
from murdering anyone who doesn't follow their Allah
murdering, child molesting god. You sat on your butts
while Hitler took over the Ruhr again to get the
ore to rearm Germany, something Germany was forbidden
to do after they first tried to take over the world in
WWI. You gave up your individual sovereignties to be
ruled by a corrupt bunch of totalitarian bureaucrats
in the EU. STUPID, STUPID, European *******s! At
least England saw the error of their way and bolted.

On Thu, 04 Jun 2020 09:22:19 -0400, nospam wrote:

they have zero chance of winning since they clearly disclosed ahead of
time what incognito mode does and does not do.

I'm going to have to agree with nospam that Google is simply doing what
Google does. Nobody thinks Google is a saint so none of us should be
surprised when Google does what Google is.

As an astute apropos related observation, it's always the Apple people who
are astoundingly surprised when Apple does what Apple is, but that's
because they're easily bamboozled by MARKETING...

It's why nospam always _blames_ everyone but Apple whenever Apple does what
Apple does (which is against what Apple "says" it does)...
o Why do apologists like Alan Baker & nospam desperately try to shift the blame of Apple bugs to Google & Microsoft?
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/LOQx1Ok-79c

however, they will probably settle out of court for less than a trial
would cost, a common legal tactic by sleazy lawyers.

Google has a lot of money where they can hire damn good lawyers.
o If they lose this one, then the lawsuit has more merit than I give it.

Notice Apple has more money than God, and they lost multiple lawsuits
(dozens to scores) on their willingly halving the speed of iPhones just so
that people would buy new ones (where Apple admitted they intentionally
slowed down iPhones for the purpose of shortening their useful life):

Even something as obvious as what Apple did, took _years_ to settle in
France:
o Apple agrees to pay 25 million euros fine as Apple admits "Apple committed the crime of deceptive commercial practice by omission"
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/l6gAjvW6aqQ/7leR4SkDAgAJ

And in the USA, Apple lost the lawsuit:
o Apple's Plan to Pay $500 Million to Settle Lawsuit Over Secretly Throttling Older iPhones Gets Preliminary Approval today
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/jN-h4WvWTEA/vzZiYZQvAwAJ

My point is that all the money in the world won't let Google (or Apple)
break the law - but it will take _years_ for us to find out the result.
--
Apologists are shocked every time Apple turns out to be what Apple is;
but nobody is shocked when Google turns out to be what Google is.

Do you know why?
o I do.

HINT: Apple users are bamboozled by (admittedly) clever Apple MARKETING.
o They "think" Apple is (somehow, magically?) different.
o They _hate_ when the facts show Apple is what Apple is.

Google users know what Google is; they're not bamboozled.

In article , Arlen Holder
wrote:

however, they will probably settle out of court for less than a trial
would cost, a common legal tactic by sleazy lawyers.

Google has a lot of money where they can hire damn good lawyers.
o If they lose this one, then the lawsuit has more merit than I give it.

it's almost certainly not going to go to trial.

they'll just throw some money at the plaintiffs to make them go away,
less than what it would have cost to litigate. as i said, it's a common
legal tactic, otherwise known as blackmail.

On Thu, 04 Jun 2020 12:02:49 -0400, nospam wrote:

Google has a lot of money where they can hire damn good lawyers.
o If they lose this one, then the lawsuit has more merit than I give it.

it's almost certainly not going to go to trial.

they'll just throw some money at the plaintiffs to make them go away,
less than what it would have cost to litigate. as i said, it's a common
legal tactic, otherwise known as blackmail.

Hi nospam,

You love to play silly semantic games, where it doesn't matter if it goes
to trial; what matters are the merits of the case.

For example, Apple willingly agreed that they committed a crime of
knowingly purposefully shortening the life of iPhones in France, paying the
criminal fine to the Paris prosecutor's office for that crime, and, yet,
the case never went to trial.

Using your metric, Apple was "blackmailed" by French criminal law, and
hence Apple threw away twenty five million to "make them go away".
--
Apologists hate when Apple turns out to be exactly what Apple really is.

Am 04.06.20 um 18:02 schrieb nospam:
In article , Arlen Holder
wrote:

however, they will probably settle out of court for less than a trial
would cost, a common legal tactic by sleazy lawyers.

Google has a lot of money where they can hire damn good lawyers.
o If they lose this one, then the lawsuit has more merit than I give it.

it's almost certainly not going to go to trial.

they'll just throw some money at the plaintiffs to make them go away,
less than what it would have cost to litigate. as i said, it's a common
legal tactic, otherwise known as blackmail.

Won't work in Europe in the long run.

On 2020-06-04 8:36 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
On Thu, 04 Jun 2020 09:22:19 -0400, nospam wrote:

they have zero chance of winning since they clearly disclosed ahead of
time what incognito mode does and does not do.

I'm going to have to agree with nospam that Google is simply doing what
Google does. Nobody thinks Google is a saint so none of us should be
surprised when Google does what Google is.

As an astute apropos related observation, it's always the Apple people who
are astoundingly surprised when Apple does what Apple is, but that's
because they're easily bamboozled by MARKETING...

This is another example of you NOT bringing up Apple in other groups, is it?

On 2020-06-04 9:37 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
On Thu, 04 Jun 2020 12:02:49 -0400, nospam wrote:

Google has a lot of money where they can hire damn good lawyers.
o If they lose this one, then the lawsuit has more merit than I give it.

it's almost certainly not going to go to trial.

they'll just throw some money at the plaintiffs to make them go away,
less than what it would have cost to litigate. as i said, it's a common
legal tactic, otherwise known as blackmail.

Hi nospam,

You love to play silly semantic games, where it doesn't matter if it goes
to trial; what matters are the merits of the case.

For example, Apple willingly agreed that they committed a crime of
knowingly purposefully shortening the life of iPhones in France, paying the
criminal fine to the Paris prosecutor's office for that crime, and, yet,
the case never went to trial.

Another lie from a liar...

On Thu, 4 Jun 2020 18:58:14 +0200, Joerg Lorenz wrote:

Won't work in Europe in the long run.

Europe does seem to hold Apple & Google more accountable:
https://i.postimg.cc/BQZ9hZg1/crime00.jpg

Google:
o Google secretly tried to stop the probe into Android a year before its record $5 billion fine from the EU
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/iS5EGxhtM8I

Apple:
o Apple agrees to pay 25 million euros fine as Apple admits
"*Apple committed the crime of deceptive commercial practice by omission*"
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/l6gAjvW6aqQ

Note in that thread how the apologists _hate_ what Apple is, so they
incessantly call all facts about Apple in that thread to be "lies by liars"
(without ever even _reading_ the cites!), even though it's a fact that no
functionally cognizant adult could possibly dispute that it was a criminal
fine in France, where Apple agreed to the criminal fine with the result
that Apple paid that twenty five million euro criminal fine to the Paris
Prosecutor's office for the stated crime as outlined in French statutes.
--
In short, Europe does seem to hold both Apple & Google accountable.