Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
California will receive $1 million as its share of a $17 million multi-state payment from Google Inc. to'settle'complaints that the Mountain View search engine improperly tracked users of Apple Safari web browsers over two years.
Google admitted to no wrongdoing in the 11-page agreement. But state attorneys general said that between June 1, 2011 and Feb. 15, 2012 Google quietly altered its advertising platform to circumvent a Safari default setting that blocks third-party cookies.
The $17 million payment to 37 states and the District of Columbia follows Google's agreement in 2012 to pay a $22.5 million'civil penalty'to settle a similar complaint brought by the Federal Trade Commission.
A spokesman for Attorney General Kamala Harris declined to comment on the multi-state settlement that will bring California $1.072 million.
“Consumers should be able to know whether there are other eyes surfing the web with them,” New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman said in a prepared statement. “By tracking millions of people without their knowledge, Google violated not only their privacy, but also their trust.”
Google spokeswoman Nadja Blagojevic said in an email that Google is “pleased” to have reached an agreement with the attorneys general.
“We work hard to get privacy right at Google and have taken steps to remove the ad cookies, which collected no personal information, from Apple's browsers,” she said.
Under terms of the settlement, Google agreed not to override browsers' cookie-blocking settings except when necessary to detect or prevent fraud. The company also agreed to create a “cookie page” to explain what data-collecting cookies are and how users can manage them.
One consumer advocacy group criticized the multi-state payment for being too low to truly penalize the giant search engine.
“When these Google guys get caught with their fingers in the cookie jar, they just buy their way out of trouble,” John Simpson, Consumer Watchdog's privacy project director, said in a press release.
Working for Google on the multi-state agreement were Kent Walker, the company's senior vice president and general counsel, and Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati partner Michael Rubin. Deputy Attorney General Adam Miller represented California in the negotiations, according to Harris' office.
Cheryl Miller writes for The Recorder, the San Franciso-based ALM sibling of Internet Law & Strategy. She can be reached at'[email protected].
'
California will receive $1 million as its share of a $17 million multi-state payment from
The $17 million payment to 37 states and the District of Columbia follows
A spokesman for Attorney General Kamala Harris declined to comment on the multi-state settlement that will bring California $1.072 million.
“Consumers should be able to know whether there are other eyes surfing the web with them,”
“We work hard to get privacy right at
Under terms of the settlement,
One consumer advocacy group criticized the multi-state payment for being too low to truly penalize the giant search engine.
“When these
Working for
Cheryl Miller writes for The Recorder, the San Franciso-based ALM sibling of Internet Law & Strategy. She can be reached at'[email protected].
'
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
GenAI's ability to produce highly sophisticated and convincing content at a fraction of the previous cost has raised fears that it could amplify misinformation. The dissemination of fake audio, images and text could reshape how voters perceive candidates and parties. Businesses, too, face challenges in managing their reputations and navigating this new terrain of manipulated content.
What Law Firms Need to Know Before Trusting AI Systems with Confidential Information In a profession where confidentiality is paramount, failing to address AI security concerns could have disastrous consequences. It is vital that law firms and those in related industries ask the right questions about AI security to protect their clients and their reputation.
The International Trade Commission is empowered to block the importation into the United States of products that infringe U.S. intellectual property rights, In the past, the ITC generally instituted investigations without questioning the importation allegations in the complaint, however in several recent cases, the ITC declined to institute an investigation as to certain proposed respondents due to inadequate pleading of importation.
As the relationship between in-house and outside counsel continues to evolve, lawyers must continue to foster a client-first mindset, offer business-focused solutions, and embrace technology that helps deliver work faster and more efficiently.
As consumers continue to shift purchasing and consumption habits in the aftermath of the pandemic, manufacturers are increasingly reliant on third-party logistics and warehousing to ensure their products timely reach the market.