HNNewShowAskJobs
Built with Tanstack Start
Google Ordered to Pay $315M for Taking Data from Idle Android Phones(reuters.com)
53 points by m463 2 days ago | 21 comments
  • cadamsdotcom2 days ago

    Analysts are now thinking in EBITDAS: Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation, Amortization, and Slaps on the Wrist.

    • remrama day ago |parent

      How much does this particular slap reduce earnings really? Alphabet shows $41 billion before tax, so 0.7%? Assuming they do pay that amount. I'm not well-versed in financial matters so please check my numbers.

      http://abc.xyz/investor/

  • gnabgib2 days ago

    Title: Google hit with $314 million US verdict in cellular data class action, which fits, why the edit - you might has well have mentioned it's jury decision in California only, like past submissions?

  • add-sub-mul-div2 days ago

    If Google pays in advance do they get to lock in this rate for next year?

    • 2 days ago |parent
      [deleted]
    • accoil2 days ago |parent

      Don't fines generally escalate for repeat offenders?

      • add-sub-mul-div2 days ago |parent

        Yes hence the joke about why it would be worthwhile to lock in this rate.

        • accoil2 days ago |parent

          I did suspect Poe was involved.

          Been trying to think it through, but I guess I'm getting annoyed by how trivial people seem to think fines are.

          I'm not sure how to research this, but it seems like most companies hit with a fine like that will change their behavior. Malicious compliance exists (and I would not put it past Google), but it is at least moving in a better direction.

          That said. I also think Google has access to powerful tools to manipulate the laws behind the fines....

          • temp48274822 days ago |parent

            Google just got hit with a $314 million fine for secretly tracking Android users’ locations. Sounds big, right? Not really. In 2024, Alphabet made $62 billion in net income — this fine is just 0.5% of that.

            History shows fines this small don’t change corporate behavior.

            Take HSBC. In 2012, they paid $1.9 billion for laundering cartel and sanctioned-country money — 11% of their profit that year. Still, they were later linked to another $4.2 billion laundering ring between 2014–2017[1][2].

            Or Pfizer. In 2009, they were fined $2.3 billion for illegally marketing drugs — about 25% of that year’s profit. Yet more settlements followed in the years after[3][4].

            If 10–25% fines didn’t deter repeat offenses, a 0.5% fine won’t even register. Google will just move on and likely continue the same behavior.

            People here think the fine is trivial because it is. Unless you include some sort of regulatory oversight or criminal charges, corporate behavior doesn't change, it's just the cost of doing business to them.

            Sources: [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/business-20673466 [2] https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2021-07-28/mon... [3] https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-... [4] [5]links weren't working unless through google, leaving the wiki page here instead on the lawsuits: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pfizer particularly the section on Illegal marketing of Bextra settlement (2009): it required a "corporate integrity agreement with the Office of Inspector General that required it to make substantial structural reforms within the company, and publish to its website its post approval commitments and a searchable database of all payments to physicians made by the company." Finally something more than just a fine.

            • accoil2 days ago |parent

              Thanks for the keywords and sources. Is there a place I can look up fines for a company?

            • lern_too_spela day ago |parent

              > Google just got hit with a $314 million fine for secretly tracking Android users’ locations

              It didn't. It got sued for using users' metered cellular data and received a judgment telling it to pay users for that data usage. There is nothing about a fine for secretly tracking locations here.

        • 2 days ago |parent
          [deleted]
        • 2 days ago |parent
          [deleted]
  • Xlythe2 days ago

    What was the data actually sent out? It was vague enough to sound like it could be tracking data (eg. Location) or it could be something like automatic updates.

    • Diti2 days ago |parent

      It’s practically everything, IMHO. Last time I set up an Android device, I had to agree to at least 9 different Terms of Service before being allowed to use the phone.

  • ajyey2 days ago

    So a tiny slap on the wrist

    • lern_too_spel2 days ago |parent

      The damages the plaintiffs claimed were cellular data usage.

    • TacticalCoder2 days ago |parent

      [dead]

    • brink2 days ago |parent

      Tired of this copy-paste comment. It shows up on literally every lawsuit thread.

      • sitkack2 days ago |parent

        Tired of comment, not the corporate malfeasance. That is you problem.

      • monsieurgaufre2 days ago |parent

        Still is true.