Court Allows Challenge To FTC’s $22.5M Google Settlement

Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 2:38 pm

    The FTC will have to defend in court why it’s penalizing Google $22.5 million for a privacy violation while still allowing the company to deny any wrongdoing.

    A federal judge late Tuesday granted Consumer Watchdog the ability to challenge the legal logic behind the FTC’s settlement with Google over charges it misrepresented its tracking of Safari Web browser users.

    Google earned that fine because the FTC alleged its actions violated a 2011 privacy settlement over the company’s rollout of the now-defunct Buzz social network. That order also subjected the company to 20 years of regular privacy check-ups and other penalties.

    Neither the FTC nor Google contested Consumer Watchdog’s court motion, which could result in a hearing. But the agency has vigorously defended its rationale, stressing that it can enforce settlements even without an admission of guilt.

    “We are confident there is no basis for this challenge,” a Google representative told POLITICO on Wednesday.

    Consumer Watchdog obtained friend-of-the-court status late Tuesday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The group believes that it can use the court to move the agency to renegotiate the settlement, while encouraging regulators to rethink the way they handle wrongdoing and liability in future cases.

    “The settlement is particularly the start of a very slippery slope,” said John Simpson, director of the group’s privacy project. “It’s very important the FTC get called on this.”

    In its brief, Consumer Watchdog criticized the current settlement as inadequate, lambasting Google’s denial of guilt as a glaring omission that fails to serve the public interest.

    The group repeatedly cited the dissent of FTC Commissioner J. Thomas Rosch, who sounded off against the agency’s imposition of a fine yet failure to secure some form of admission of wrongdoing from the company.

    The remaining four commissioners, however, argued earlier this month that Google’s denial is in some ways unimportant to the FTC.

    In their joint statement, Chairman Jon Leibowitz and his colleagues say they could still act against Google even in the absence of that admission, and noted the settlement doesn’t change the fact the search giant must still abide by the rules or face further penalties.

    But the FTC chose not to argue against Consumer Watchdog’s court motion. In its Aug. 22 filing, lawyers for the FTC instead asked only for expeditious consideration.

    Consumer Watchdog now has until Sept. 21 to submit a full amicus brief, with replies from the FTC and Google due on Sept. 28. Arguing the case on behalf of Consumer Watchdog are Gary Reback and Robert J. Yorio. Reback has represented companies fighting Google on grounds that some of its business conduct is anti-competitive.

    , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    This post was written by:

    - who has written 6 posts on Inside Google.

    Contact the author

    Leave a Reply

    ルイヴィトンは旅行の芸術なので、ルイヴィトンは比較的人気の高いブランドで、現在は手動で機械的に混合してパッケージングを行っています。 ルイヴィトンiphoneケースの海外での価格は、国民に比較的近いです。 しかし、エルメスは異なっています。馬が馬を生産するのは初めてです。そのため、エルメスは主に手作りの芸術であり、一般的な意味では贅沢ではありません。 エルメスiphoneケースのすべての製品は、芸術作品として楽しんで保存することができます。 ルイ?ヴィトンは、価格面ではルイ?ヴィトンよりもはるかに高いですが、質の面ではそれほど優れているわけではありませんが、近年では生産の増加により衰退の兆しが見えてきました。 最も顕著なパフォーマンスは、ブランド携帯ケース伝統的に手作業で加工された部品の多くが現在機械加工されていることです。加工の質は向上しますが、機械と労働は必ずしも成績ではありません。