Google has been ordered by a courtroom within the U.S. state of California to pay $314 million over expenses that it misused Android system customers’ mobile information once they have been idle to passively ship data to the corporate.
The decision marks an finish to a authorized class-action criticism that was initially filed in August 2019.
Of their lawsuit, the plaintiffs argued that Google’s Android working system leverages customers’ mobile information to transmit a “number of data to Google” with out their permission, even when their gadgets are saved in an idle state.
“Though Google may make it in order that these transfers occur solely when the telephones are related to Wi-Fi, Google as a substitute designed these transfers to allow them to additionally happen over a mobile community,” they mentioned.
“Google’s unauthorized use of their mobile information violates California regulation and requires Google to compensate Plaintiffs for the worth of the mobile information that Google makes use of for its personal profit with out their permission.”
The transfers, the plaintiffs argued, happen when Google properties are open and working within the background, even in conditions the place a person has closed all Google apps, and their system is dormant, thereby misappropriating customers’ mobile information allowances.
In a single occasion, the plaintiffs discovered {that a} Samsung Galaxy S7 system with the default settings and the usual pre-loaded apps, and related to a brand new Google account, despatched and acquired 8.88 MB/day of mobile information, out of which 94% of the communications have been between Google and the system.
The knowledge trade occurred roughly 389 occasions inside a span of 24 hours. The transferred data primarily consisted of log recordsdata containing working system metrics, community state, and the record of open apps.
“Log recordsdata are usually not time-sensitive, and transmission of them may simply be delayed till Wi-Fi is on the market,” in line with courtroom paperwork.
“Google may additionally program Android to permit customers to allow passive transfers solely when they’re on Wi-Fi connections, however apparently it has chosen not to take action. As an alternative, Google has chosen to easily reap the benefits of Plaintiffs’ mobile information allowances.”
That is not all. The courtroom criticism additionally cited one other 2018 experiment that discovered that an Android system that was “outwardly dormant and stationary” however had the Chrome internet browser app opened and within the background resulted in about 900 passive transfers in 24 hours.
Compared, a stationary and untouched iPhone with the Safari browser open within the background despatched “considerably much less data,” and famous that Apple’s working system provides customers better management with regards to passive data transfers.
Following a trial that commenced on June 2, 2025, the jury sided with the plaintiffs, stating the tech big was answerable for performing these passive information transfers and inflicting them to shoulder what they mentioned have been “necessary and unavoidable burdens […] for Google’s profit and comfort.”
In a press release to Reuters, Google mentioned it could enchantment the choice and contended the information transfers are associated to “providers which might be crucial to the safety, efficiency, and reliability of Android gadgets.” The corporate additionally identified that it discloses the transfers in its phrases of use settlement and obtains consent for them.
The jury resolution comes almost two months after the corporate agreed to pay almost $1.4 billion to settle two lawsuits within the state of Texas that accused it of monitoring customers’ private location and sustaining their facial recognition information with out consent.
The event additionally follows a press release from Meta that it is interesting a European Fee’s resolution in April 2025 that its pay-or-consent mannequin violates the area’s Digital Markets Act (DMA), fining it €200 million ($227 million).
“The choice mandates that Meta should provide a much less customized advertisements service without spending a dime, disregarding value, affect, or effectiveness, and imposes a probably unviable enterprise mannequin,” the corporate mentioned.
“This overlooks the business actuality that, in a market financial system, Meta deserves honest compensation for the dear and revolutionary providers that customers select to make use of – a precept important to sustaining innovation and financial progress.
