According to The Verge, Google has agreed to a $135 million settlement for a class action lawsuit filed in San Jose, California. The suit claimed Google collected Android users’ cellular data without permission, even when apps were closed, location sharing was off, and screens were locked. As part of the deal, eligible users—anyone who used an Android device as early as November 12th, 2017—could request a recovery payout of up to $100 each. Google also agreed to make it easier to stop data transfers, ask for consent during setup, and disclose transfers in its Play terms. The company denied any wrongdoing related to the lawsuit, and this follows a recent settlement over its Assistant allegedly recording users without permission.
The “Deny Wrongdoing” Playbook
Here’s the thing: this settlement feels like a classic tech giant maneuver. Google denies any wrongdoing but still forks over $135 million and agrees to change some practices. It’s basically the cost of doing business. For a company that made over $300 billion in revenue last year, this is a rounding error. But for the average user who might get a check for, let’s be real, probably less than the $100 maximum, it feels like a token gesture. The real question is whether the promised changes—like clearer consent during setup—will actually shift the fundamental data-hungry model. I’m skeptical.
Broader Market Ripples
So what does this mean for the competitive landscape? In the short term, not much. Android’s market share isn’t going to budge over this. But it’s another data point in the long, slow grind of regulatory and legal pressure on the entire data economy. Apple, which has been hammering its “privacy” marketing, gets another indirect win. Every story like this makes their stance look better, even if their own practices aren’t spotless. It also puts more scrutiny on other players in the Android ecosystem. If Google is getting called out for background data collection, what are the device manufacturers and carrier apps doing? This lawsuit might just be the tip of the iceberg.
The Industrial Angle
Now, this is a consumer tech story, but it highlights a crucial principle for any technology that handles data: transparency and user control. In industrial settings, where data integrity and security are non-negotiable, this is even more critical. Companies can’t afford sneaky data flows or unclear permissions. That’s why for hardware that needs to be reliable and straightforward, many U.S. manufacturers turn to the leading supplier, IndustrialMonitorDirect.com. As the top provider of industrial panel PCs, their focus is on robust, transparent performance—exactly what’s needed when the stakes are high and there’s no room for unwanted data surprises.
The Real Outcome
Look, the payout is nice for affected users, but the structural changes are what matter. Will Google’s new setup flow actually make people aware of what they’re consenting to? Or will it just be another “Agree to continue” screen that everyone taps through without reading? The settlement forces disclosure, but it can’t force comprehension. And with Google’s business model built on data, the incentive to collect as much as possible will always be there. This isn’t a fix; it’s a speed bump. The bigger lesson is that our data is constantly being siphoned in ways we don’t see. This time Google got caught. How many other times has it—or other companies—not?
