The Google Incognito lawsuit has led to a significant class-action case, originally filed in 2020 and still active as of 2024. including breaches of federal wiretap, state privacy, and consumer protection laws, for allegedly tracking users without their consent in Incognito Mode. Users allege that despite assurances of privacy, Google continued to track browsing activities, usage patterns, and preferences, leading to targeted ads on products they believed they were browsing privately. The lawsuit highlights concerns over what private browsing truly entails and questions whether Google adequately informs users about Incognito mode’s limitations.
In response, Google agreed to a $5 billion settlement to resolve claims that it misled users about the privacy offered by Incognito mode. While the settlement doesn’t imply Google’s admission of wrongdoing, it avoids the risks and expenses of a prolonged trial. This settlement not only provides financial compensation for affected users, but includes stipulations to improve transparency around privacy policies and can lead to changes in how features like Incognito Mode are marketed or explained to the public.
If the $5 billion settlement is finalized and approved by the court, users who used Incognito mode within a specified period may be eligible to file claims to receive compensation for a portion of the funds. Here’s how the process generally works:
Here’s how it typically works in class-action settlements:
- Eligibility Criteria: Only users who meet specific criteria (e.g., using Incognito Mode within a certain timeframe) would qualify.
- Claim Process: Eligible individuals would need to submit a claim, usually through a dedicated website or claims administrator.
- Distribution: Once claims are verified, funds are distributed to claimants. The payout per person depends on the number of claims filed and the final settlement terms.
This settlement also includes non-monetary measures, such as transparency improvements in Google’s communication about Incognito Mode, to better inform users about what’s tracked during private browsing.
What’s at the Heart of the Lawsuit?
The plaintiffs argue that Google misled users by promoting Incognito mode as private, while continuing to track user activity through cookies, IP addresses, and other tracking methods. Google, however, contends that it does not misrepresent Incognito mode’s capabilities, stating that Incognito prevents data from being saved locally but does not stop websites or Google itself from collecting data during the session.
Potential Impact on Users
If Google is found liable, users who relied on Incognito for privacy may be eligible for compensation. The case could also pressure Google to change its privacy disclosures and policies for Incognito mode to more transparently communicate what data, if any, is collected.
What Should Users Do?
Those concerned about their privacy in Incognito mode can join the lawsuit if eligible on our partner site here, or look into alternative privacy measures, such as using a VPN or privacy-focused browsers like Tor, which provide additional layers of protection beyond private browsing tabs.
Users may argue that Google’s branding and disclosures around Incognito mode were insufficient and misleading, creating a privacy expectation that wasn’t met and the violation of user trust and privacy warrants compensation.
As a user, here are 4 arguments to consider:
1. Misleading Marketing and Communication: Plaintiffs could present evidence that Google’s marketing and interface language imply a level of privacy that suggests “private browsing” also means freedom from data collection by Google. Ads, FAQs, and the visual design of Incognito mode could be scrutinized to show that an average user would interpret Incognito as truly private.
2. Failure to Fully Disclose Data Collection Methods: Plaintiffs may argue that Google didn’t adequately disclose that data could still be tracked through cookies, IP addresses, and other tracking methods during Incognito sessions. They could claim that Google’s lack of clear and accessible disclosure misled users into thinking Incognito prevented all tracking.
3. Breach of User Trust and Expectation of Privacy: Many users choose Incognito mode to avoid tracking, and plaintiffs might argue that Google’s continued data collection betrays the user’s trust and privacy expectations. The plaintiffs could use surveys or studies showing user beliefs about private browsing modes to demonstrate that most people misunderstand the extent of data protection in Incognito mode.
4. Economic Damages and Privacy Violations: Plaintiffs may claim they suffered harm by having their browsing activity tracked against their consent, potentially raising issues around financial and privacy damages. They may argue that Google benefited financially by collecting Incognito data, leveraging it to enhance ad targeting and other business objectives.
This case underscores the importance of transparency in digital privacy, especially as more users demand control over their personal information online. The lawsuit’s outcome could influence privacy standards across the tech industry.
At Howard Injury Law, we will expertly guide you through the legal process as your dedicated personal injury lawyer. From the initial free consultation to the resolution of your case, our experienced attorneys serve Nevada, California, Colorado, and Arizona, and are committed to providing comprehensive support and representation. We understand the complexities and challenges that come with personal injury claims, and we are here to ensure that your rights are protected every step of the way.
Free Consultation with Howard Injury Law:
📲 (702) 331-5722 M-F/9-5
🗣 Se Habla Español
🗣 Wǒmen shuō pǔtōnghuà hé yuèyǔ
For ongoing news updates and personal injury safety tips, follow us on Instagram, Facebook, TikTok, or X and stay informed. Searching for injury attorney or injury lawyer near me? Find us on Google Maps!
