Google has been ordered by a court in the U.S. state of California to pay $314 million over charges that it misused Android device users’ cellular data when they were idle to passively send information to the company.
The verdict marks an end to a legal class-action complaint that was originally filed in August 2019.
In their lawsuit, the plaintiffs argued that Google’s Android operating system leverages users’ cellular data to transmit a “variety of information to Google” without their permission, even when their devices are kept in an idle state.
“Although Google could make it so that these transfers happen only when the phones are connected to Wi-Fi, Google instead designed these transfers so they can also take place over a cellular network,” they said.
“Google’s unauthorized use of their cellular data violates California law and requires Google to compensate Plaintiffs for the value of the cellular data that Google uses for its own benefit without their permission.”
The transfers, the plaintiffs argued, occur when Google properties are open and operating in the background, even in situations where a user has closed all Google apps, and their device is dormant, thereby misappropriating users’ cellular data allowances.
In one instance, the plaintiffs found that a Samsung Galaxy S7 device with the default settings and the standard pre-loaded apps, and connected to a new Google account, sent and received 8.88 MB/day of cellular data, out of which 94% of the communications were between Google and the device.
The information exchange happened approximately 389 times within a span of 24 hours. The transferred information mainly consisted of log files containing operating system metrics, network state, and the list of open apps.
“Log files are typically not time-sensitive, and transmission of them could easily be delayed until Wi-Fi is available,” according to court documents.
“Google could also program Android to allow users to enable passive transfers only when they are on Wi-Fi connections, but apparently it has chosen not to do so. Instead, Google has chosen to simply take advantage of Plaintiffs’ cellular data allowances.”
That’s not all. The court complaint also cited another 2018 experiment that found that an Android device that was “outwardly dormant and stationary” but had the Chrome web browser app opened and in the background resulted in about 900 passive transfers in 24 hours.
In comparison, a stationary and untouched iPhone with the Safari browser open in the background sent “significantly less information,” and noted that Apple’s operating system gives users greater control when it comes to passive information transfers.
Following a trial that commenced on June 2, 2025, the jury sided with the plaintiffs, stating the tech giant was liable for performing these passive data transfers and causing them to shoulder what they said were “mandatory and unavoidable burdens […] for Google’s benefit and convenience.”
In a statement to Reuters, Google said it would appeal the decision and contended the data transfers are related to “services that are critical to the security, performance, and reliability of Android devices.” The company also pointed out that it discloses the transfers in its terms of use agreement and obtains consent for them.
The jury decision comes nearly two months after the company agreed to pay nearly $1.4 billion to settle two lawsuits in the state of Texas that accused it of tracking users’ personal location and maintaining their facial recognition data without consent.
The development also follows a statement from Meta that it’s appealing a European Commission’s decision in April 2025 that its pay-or-consent model violates the region’s Digital Markets Act (DMA), fining it €200 million ($227 million).
“The decision mandates that Meta must offer a less personalized ads service for free, disregarding cost, impact, or effectiveness, and imposes a potentially unviable business model,” the company said.
“This overlooks the commercial reality that, in a market economy, Meta deserves fair compensation for the valuable and innovative services that users choose to use – a principle essential to sustaining innovation and economic growth.
About The Author
Original post here
