A group of Republican-led states have recently taken a stand against a $62 million consumer privacy settlement with Google. Led by Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird (R), a group of 20 state attorneys general have filed a petition to the 9th Circuit, urging them to reject the settlement.
The settlement in question stems from a class-action lawsuit filed against Google for allegedly violating user privacy by tracking their online activities through their web browser’s “incognito” mode. The lawsuit, which was filed in 2016, accused Google of collecting data even when users were browsing in private mode.
While the settlement may seem like a win for consumers, the group of Republican-led states is raising concerns about the distribution of the settlement funds. According to the petition, a large portion of the $62 million settlement is set to go towards the lawyers representing the class members and various advocacy groups, leaving little for the affected consumers.
In their argument, the states pointed out that the proposed settlement would award $5,000 to each of the three named plaintiffs, while the remaining class members would only receive a mere $5 each. This stark difference in compensation raises questions about the fairness of the settlement and whether it truly benefits the consumers who were affected by Google’s alleged privacy violations.
Furthermore, the states argue that the lawyers representing the class members are set to receive a whopping $21.3 million, while the remaining $16.3 million will go towards various advocacy groups. This allocation of funds has raised concerns about the true intentions of the settlement and whether it is truly in the best interest of the affected consumers.
The group of Republican-led states is not alone in their opposition to the settlement. The Department of Justice has also raised concerns about the distribution of the settlement funds, stating that it “may not be fair, reasonable, and adequate.” This further highlights the need for a thorough review of the settlement before it is approved by the 9th Circuit.
In their petition, the states are not only advocating for a fair distribution of the settlement funds but also for stricter regulations on tech companies when it comes to user privacy. They argue that the proposed settlement does not hold Google accountable for their actions and does not provide adequate protection for consumers in the future.
This move by the Republican-led states is commendable as it shows their commitment to protecting the rights and interests of their citizens. It also serves as a reminder to tech companies that they cannot get away with violating user privacy without facing consequences.
In response to the petition, Google has stated that they have always been committed to protecting user privacy and that the allegations against them are baseless. They also argue that the settlement is fair and reasonable, and that it provides adequate compensation to the affected consumers.
While Google may argue that the settlement is fair, it is clear that the concerns raised by the group of Republican-led states and the Department of Justice cannot be ignored. The 9th Circuit must carefully review the settlement and ensure that it truly benefits the affected consumers and holds Google accountable for their actions.
In conclusion, the move by the group of Republican-led states to oppose the $62 million consumer privacy settlement with Google is a step in the right direction. It highlights the need for stricter regulations on tech companies and serves as a reminder that user privacy must be protected at all costs. The 9th Circuit must carefully consider the concerns raised and ensure that the final settlement truly benefits the affected consumers.
