In a major escalation of one of the largest digital privacy disputes in U.S. history, consumers are now demanding that Google pay $2.36 billion in profits allegedly earned through unlawful data collection practices. The request follows a federal jury’s earlier decision that awarded just $425 million in damages to users whose data was tracked without consent — a verdict that consumer advocates argue fails to hold the tech giant fully accountable.
The Case Behind the $2.36 Billion Demand
The class-action lawsuit, filed in 2020, accused Google of covertly collecting app-activity data from millions of users over nearly a decade — even when those users had explicitly turned off the company’s “Web & App Activity” tracking feature. Plaintiffs claimed that Google continued gathering data from apps and websites tied to users’ Google accounts, allowing it to build targeted advertising profiles and derive substantial profits.
After years of litigation, a San Francisco federal jury found Google liable on two of the three privacy claims brought forward by the plaintiffs. The class includes approximately 98 million users across 174 million devices, representing a massive portion of Google’s U.S. user base.
While the jury awarded $425 million in compensatory damages, plaintiffs argue that the figure is “a fraction of what’s necessary” to remedy the harm. In a court filing submitted Wednesday, they described the damages as “clearly insufficient to redress the ongoing and irreparable harm” caused by Google’s actions.
Plaintiffs Seek Disgorgement of Profits
Now, plaintiffs are asking the court to order Google to disgorge an estimated $2.36 billion in profits it allegedly earned through the data collected during the eight-year period in question. According to their legal team, the amount represents a “conservative estimate” of the revenue Google gained by exploiting private user data under false pretenses.
Their motion argues that compensatory damages alone fail to address the gravity of Google’s misconduct or deter future violations. The plaintiffs contend that disgorgement — a legal remedy requiring a defendant to surrender profits obtained through unlawful acts — is both justified and essential for accountability in the digital-privacy era.
“The only way to ensure meaningful deterrence,” plaintiffs’ counsel wrote, “is to deprive Google of the ill-gotten profits derived from this deceptive data-collection scheme.”
Google Denies Wrongdoing
Google has repeatedly denied the allegations. The company maintains that its data collection practices are transparent and that users have meaningful control over their privacy settings. According to Google, the data at issue was anonymized and used to improve user experience rather than for invasive tracking.
In addition to opposing the disgorgement request, Google has filed a motion to decertify the class, arguing that the 98 million affected users are too diverse to be treated as a single group. The company asserts that each user’s experience — including their privacy settings, app usage, and awareness of data collection — varies widely, making class-wide resolution inappropriate.
A spokesperson for Google emphasized that the company provides “robust privacy tools and clear user options,” and that it disagrees with the jury’s findings.
The Legal Questions Ahead
The case now rests with U.S. District Judge Richard Seeborg, who will determine whether disgorgement of profits is legally permissible under the applicable privacy and consumer-protection statutes. Legal analysts say this decision could have wide-ranging implications for the tech industry, particularly in defining the boundaries of profit recovery in data-privacy lawsuits.
If Judge Seeborg allows disgorgement, Google could face an unprecedented financial penalty — more than five times the initial jury award. Such an outcome might also embolden similar lawsuits against other major tech firms, especially those accused of continuing to track users after they’ve opted out of data sharing.
Broader Implications for Privacy and Big Tech
The outcome of this case could help shape how courts handle data-collection disputes in the future. Privacy advocates argue that traditional compensatory damages are insufficient to deter violations by trillion-dollar corporations, for whom such awards represent minor costs of doing business.
By contrast, disgorgement — which forces companies to hand over profits obtained through unlawful conduct — could serve as a powerful deterrent. Legal experts note that this approach mirrors enforcement strategies seen in securities-fraud and antitrust cases, now being tested in the realm of consumer privacy.
If the court sides with consumers, it may mark a turning point in the long-running debate over digital accountability. “For years, Big Tech has treated user data as a limitless resource,” one privacy attorney noted. “This case could be the one that finally establishes that consent must mean something.”
What Comes Next
The next phase will likely involve detailed hearings on whether Google’s profits can be tied directly to the disputed data-collection practices. Plaintiffs are expected to present financial analyses illustrating how the company’s advertising revenues benefited from user activity data, even after tracking was supposedly disabled.
If the court allows the disgorgement claim to move forward, Google could face a prolonged battle — potentially stretching into appeals. On the other hand, if the court rejects the motion, plaintiffs may seek further legislative or regulatory remedies, reinforcing ongoing calls for stronger federal privacy protections.
A Case That Could Reshape the Rules
The $2.36 billion request dramatically raises the stakes in the ongoing fight over online privacy and consumer control. It also underscores the growing willingness of courts and consumers alike to challenge the data practices of powerful technology firms.
Whether Google is ultimately forced to surrender billions or manages to limit its liability, this case highlights a clear trend: the era of unchecked data collection is facing its most serious legal test yet.
Stay informed on major legal developments affecting Big Tech, privacy law, and digital rights at JDJournal.com. For law students and professionals seeking opportunities in data privacy and consumer protection law, explore exclusive listings on LawCrossing.