FTC’s $22.5 Million Penalty For Google Is Insufficient Without Admission Of Wrongdoing, Consumer Watchdog Says; Group Hopes To Block Settlement

Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 11:56 am

    FTC’s $22.5 Million Penalty For Google Is Insufficient Without Admission Of Wrongdoing, Consumer Watchdog Says; Group Hopes To Block Settlement

    SANTA MONICA, CA – The Federal Trade Commission’s record $22.5 million penalty against Google is inadequate unless the Internet giant admits its wrongdoing, Consumer Watchdog said today.

    The nonpartisan nonprofit public interest group said it will try to block the settlement, which must still be approved by a federal judge, unless Google admits to violating the so called “Buzz” Consent Agreement with the Commission.  The FTC charged that Google claimed it was honoring privacy settings on iPads, iPhones and other devices using the Safari browser when in fact it was circumventing them.

    Read the FTC complaint and proposed settlement here: http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/c4336/index.shtm.

    The Commission voted 4-to-1 to approve the settlement with Google.  Commissioner J. Thomas Rosch opposed the settlement because it allows Google to deny liability.  He wrote that allowing the denial of liability, while imposing a civil penalty of $22.5 million “in circumstances such as these is unprecedented.”

    “While the $22.5 million penalty levied against Google is a record for the FTC, it is woefully insufficient considering that Google refused to admit any liability or wrongdoing,” said John M. Simpson, Consumer Watchdog’s Privacy Project Director.  “The Commission has allowed Google to buy its way out of trouble for an amount that probably is less than the company spends on lunches for its employees and with no admission it did anything wrong.”

    Consumer Watchdog had filed a complaint in February with the FTC after Stanford Researcher Jonathan Mayer revealed how Google was circumventing privacy settings on Apple’s Safari browser.

    “Google hacked past a key privacy setting on iPhones and iPads and other devices using Apple’s Safari browser, placed tracking cookies on them and then lied, saying the settings were still effective,” said Simpson. “Clearly it violated its agreement with the FTC.”

    Read Consumer Watchdog’s complaint to the FTC here: http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/resources/ltrleibowitz021712.pdf.

    A study released Feb. 17 by Mayer of Stanford University’s Security Lab, and the Center for Internet and Society, found that Google was circumventing a privacy setting in Apple’s Safari web browser.  Like most web browsers, Safari provides the option not to receive third-party “cookies.”  Cookies are small bits of code placed on the browser and can be used by ad networks to track you as you surf the web. Blocking third-party cookies is supposed to prevent such tracking.

    Safari is the primary browser on the iPhone and iPad. It is also the default browser on Apple’s computers.

    Read Jonathan Mayer’s study here: http://webpolicy.org/2012/02/17/safari-trackers/.

    – 30 –

    Visit our website at: www.ConsumerWatchdog.org.

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

    This post was written by:

    John M. Simpson

    - who has written 414 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。