Google Ordered to Pay $314 Million Over Misuse of Android Users’ Data
Overview of the Ruling
In a significant legal ruling, a California court has mandated that Google compensate $314 million due to allegations regarding the improper use of Android users’ cellular data. This judgment wraps up a class-action lawsuit that was initiated back in August 2019, shedding light on privacy violations concerning how Google’s Android operating system manages user data.
Allegations Against Google
The plaintiffs in the lawsuit argued that Google’s Android system harnessed cellular data even when users believed their devices were idle. According to the complaint, this data transmission occurred without the explicit consent of users, effectively siphoning off precious cellular data allowances. The lawsuit claimed that while Google could have configured its systems to limit data transfers to Wi-Fi connections, it opted instead to allow data exchanges over cellular networks.
The core of the complaint highlighted that these unauthorized data transfers not only infringed on user privacy but also violated California law, necessitating compensation for users who had their cellular data leveraged for Google’s commercial benefit.
Details of the Data Transmission
Further investigation revealed that these data transfers took place even when users had closed Google applications and their devices were not in active use. For instance, a test conducted with a Samsung Galaxy S7 revealed that the device transmitted roughly 8.88 MB of data daily, predominantly split between Google and the device itself. Alarmingly, 94% of this data consisted of communications from the device to Google.
During a single day, the device managed approximately 389 separate data exchanges, primarily sending log files that contained metrics related to operating system performance and network status. These transfers were deemed unnecessary since log file information isn’t time-sensitive; thus, they could have easily been postponed until the device connected to Wi-Fi.
Comparative Data Handling
The lawsuit also referenced a 2018 experiment showcasing that an Android device, despite appearing inactive—with the Chrome browser left open—could engage in nearly 900 passive data transfers within a 24-hour span. In comparison, an iPhone running the Safari browser under the same conditions transferred significantly less data, underscoring that Apple’s operating system offers users more control over how their data is shared.
Court’s Findings
In the trial that began on June 2, 2025, the jury found Google liable for the passive data transfers, ruling that these actions imposed unjust burdens on the plaintiffs while benefiting the tech giant. The verdict emphasized that users were being subjected to excess data usage due to Google’s design choices.
Google’s Response
In response to the court’s ruling, Google has stated its intention to appeal. The company argues that the data transfers are essential for maintaining the security, performance, and reliability of Android devices. Additionally, Google pointed out that its terms of use disclose these transfers, and user consent is obtained prior to engaging in such data exchanges.
Broader Implications and Context
This verdict follows closely on the heels of a recent settlement where Google agreed to pay approximately $1.4 billion to resolve two lawsuits in Texas, which accused the company of tracking user location and storing facial recognition data without permission. This pattern of legal scrutiny reflects growing concerns regarding user privacy and data protection across the tech industry.
In a related development, Meta has announced its intention to contest a decision from the European Commission that found its “pay-or-consent” model was in violation of the Digital Markets Act. Meta contended that this ruling imposed a damaging business model that could stifle innovation.
Conclusion
The ruling against Google regarding the alleged misuse of Android users’ cellular data signals a pivotal moment in the ongoing discourse about digital privacy and corporate accountability. As the situation develops, it could influence how technology companies approach user data in the future.
