Go to Wolters Kluwer VitalLaw.comGo to Wolters Kluwer VitalLaw.com
VitalLaw®
  • Find answers to your questions
  • Log in to access your subscriptions
In depth. On point.
In depth. On point.
  • Home
  • Legal Directory
  • Home
  • Legal Directory
In depth. On point.
  • Articles
  • Articles
  • Law Firms
  • Law Firms
  • Organizations
  • Organizations
    • TOP STORY—S.D.N.Y.: LIBOR plaintiffs may not amend antitrust claims
    • AGENCY NEWS: David Gelfand joins Antitrust Division as Deputy Attorney General
    • ANTITRUST—E.D. Pa.: Statute of limitations barred some claims in multidistrict egg products case
    • ANTITRUST—N.D. Ill.: Retail purchasers of milk and cheese lacked standing to pursue price fixing claims under federal law
    • PRIVACY NEWS: Groups protest proposed settlement in Google privacy case
    • RICO—S.D. Tex.: RICO Claim dismissed because statute did not apply extraterritorially
    • STATE UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES NEWS: New York challenges “Trump University” advertising
    • STATE UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES—N.D. Cal.: Consumer unfair competition claims proceed over Crisco oil labeling
  • Articles
  • Articles
  • Law Firms
  • Law Firms
  • Organizations
  • Organizations

    Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, PRIVACY NEWS: Groups protest proposed settlement in Google privacy case, (Aug 26, 2013)

    Organizations Mentioned:Google, Inc. | World Privacy Forum

    The Electronic Privacy Information Center, Consumer Watchdog, the Center for Digital Democracy, Patient Privacy Rights, and Privacy Rights Clearinghouse have sent a letter urging U.S. District Judge Edward J. Davila of the Northern District of Califo ...

    The Electronic Privacy Information Center, Consumer Watchdog, the Center for Digital Democracy, Patient Privacy Rights, and Privacy Rights Clearinghouse have sent a letter urging U.S. District Judge Edward J. Davila of the Northern District of California to reject a proposed settlement in a class action lawsuit against Google, Inc., over alleged privacy violations related to the company’s handling of users’ search data. They objected to the proposed settlement’s lack of a requirement for Google to change its business practices. They also protested that the seven organizations proposed as beneficiaries of a “cy pres” allocation of the settlement fund in lieu of “silent class members” do not meet the Ninth Circuit’s legal standard for such distributions because their interests do not align with the interests of the class members and that only one of the organizations, the World Privacy Forum, has “the protection of privacy as a mission.”

    Companies: Google, Inc.

    News: Privacy

    © 2026 CCH Incorporated and its affiliates and licensors. All rights reserved.

    • Manage Cookie Preferences
    • Privacy Statement
    • Terms of Use