We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Judge rules against 'Google You Owe Us' campaign group - MSE News
Options
Former_MSE_Callum
Posts: 696 Forumite
in Techie Stuff
Consumers have been struck a blow in their fight against Google, after a judge ruled against a campaign group which claims the tech heavyweight unlawfully collected personal data and should pay compensation to millions of iPhone users...
Read the full story:
'Judge rules against 'Google You Owe Us' campaign group'
Click reply below to discuss. If you haven’t already, join the forum to reply.
'Judge rules against 'Google You Owe Us' campaign group'
Click reply below to discuss. If you haven’t already, join the forum to reply.
Read the latest MSE News
Flag up a news story: news@moneysavingexpert.com
Get the Free MoneySavingExpert Money Tips E-mail
Flag up a news story: news@moneysavingexpert.com
Get the Free MoneySavingExpert Money Tips E-mail
0
Comments
-
Maybe if the name of the collective action group wasn't so obviously grabby, the judge would have looked on their claim more favourably?0
-
Thank God for common sense.0
-
This was patently obviously an "ambulance chasing" style claim. However the underlying issue is real ... Google actively sought a way to override privacy settings.
The interesting point for me was that the main guy running this (and the "representative claimant") was a former head of Which!0 -
Those who thought they were affected were able to sign up to the group action against Google, and after mass press coverage, around 20,000 did so.
So they had zero proof that they were affected and surprised to have lost?
I thought i was affected, and still think i was even though i did not have an iphone. But its the thought that counts right?
Actual proof is not required?Censorship Reigns Supreme in Troll City...0 -
forgotmyname wrote: »I thought i was affected, and still think i was even though i did not have an iphone. But its the thought that counts right?
Actual proof is not required?
Seems to work with twitterati;)Eight out of ten owners who expressed a preference said their cats preferred other peoples gardens0 -
Furious iPhone users rage that Google won't be paying for their over priced new iPhone....
Hey guys, you could always get an Android?
0 -
Furious iPhone users rage that Google won't be paying for their over priced new iPhone....
Hey guys, you could always get an Android?
I did get an Android but i still think it affected me.
If they can do that an an iPhone then it should be a doddle on an Android device.Censorship Reigns Supreme in Troll City...0 -
forgotmyname wrote: »I did get an Android but i still think it affected me.
If they can do that an an iPhone then it should be a doddle on an Android device.
It already is a doddle..... yep Depends what they're collecting about you I guess. 0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.6K Spending & Discounts
- 244K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.9K Life & Family
- 257.4K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards