Google is looking down the barrel of another lawsuit that is related to the issue where Google tricked the Apple Safari browser. The claim, which later turned out to be true, states that Google forced tracking cookies through Safari even when the browser was set to reject them. This issue forced Google to reach a $17 million settlement with 37 U.S. states in November of 2012. Google halted its tricking of Safari in February after it was reported by the media.
After the settlement, it was thought that the issue was over, but a group of privacy activists in the UK launched a similar suit against Google. The search engine giant argued that the English court could not try these claims due to the nature of the claim and jurisdiction issues. Google also asked the court to allow the claim to be tried in the United States where the company is based.
On Thursday, however, the High Court in London turned down Google's request, which now gives the privacy activists the full go ahead to proceed with the case in England. Strangely enough, if the activists want Google to stop tricking web browsers, they will have to try their luck in a U.S. court of law.
"I am satisfied that there is a serious issue to be tried in each of the Claimants' claims for misuse of private information... The Claimants' application to rely on ground (9) in relation to the DPA [Data Protection Act] claim is allowed... the Claimants have clearly established that this jurisdiction is the appropriate one in which to try each of the above claims," Justice Tugendhat of the High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division, ruled.
Tugendhat rejected Google's claim because the relevant data was not private. He also pointed out that the persons making the claim are individual residents of the UK, thus meaning for them to make a case in the U.S. it could cost them a lot of money.
"If an American court had to resolve these issues no doubt it could do so, aided by expert evidence on English law. But that would be costly for all parties, and it would be better for all parties that the issues of English law be resolved by an English court, with the usual right of appeal, which would not be available if the issues were resolved by an American court deciding English law as a question of fact," the judge ruled.
In response to the ruling, Judith Vidal-Hall, who is one of the claimants, had the following to say: "We want to know how Google came to ignore user preferences to track us online; how did they get around Apple's program settings - they have said it was accidental, but how do you accidentally interfere with someone else's program? We want to know how long they have done this for, what they've done with our private data, how much they have made from this, and why they keep flouting privacy laws? This case is about protecting the rights of all internet users who use a company that is virtually a monopoly but seems intent on ignoring their right to privacy."
Google said it will appeal the case.
