Google can't shake class claims it invaded minors' privacy through ads

SAN JOSE, Calif. (CN) — A judge allowed on Monday for privacy claims to survive dismissal in a class action against Google filed by minors and their parents who say the tech company has been collecting data from the children’s viewing habits in violation of federal law.

In her 37-page order, U.S. Magistrate Judge Susan Van Keulen found the plaintiffs properly claimed that Google collected and held on to protected consumer data without permission.

“In sum, plaintiffs sufficiently allege that Google engaged in highly offensive conduct. The court, therefore, will not dismiss the privacy claims,” Van Keulen ruled.

The judge declined to hold responsible the owners of popular YouTube channels named in the lawsuit, like Dreamworks Animation, Cartoon Network and Hasbro, stating that their conduct as content creators wasn’t enough to “sufficiently tie” them to Google’s supposed wrongful data collection and that they had not collected any data themselves.

“Even if the court accepted that the channel owners affirmatively chose to present their viewers with behavioral advertising, it does not follow from that choice that the channel owners knew that doing so would assist Google in its data collection, let alone improper data collection,” Van Keulen wrote.

Van Keulen ruled that the claims fell into three primary categories: specific privacy torts of intrusion upon seclusion, unjust enrichment claims and violations of consumer-protection statutes.

Although she admitted it was a high bar to prove, even at the pleading stage, Van Keulen found that the plaintiffs adequately claimed “highly offensive” conduct by Google with respect to privacy. The judge also noted the difference between YouTube’s main website and YouTube Kids, which does not have behavioral tracking and advertising.

“Despite the existence of YouTube Kids, Google nevertheless targeted children in connection with the main YouTube website and that platform’s data tracking. The court cannot conclude as a matter of law that targeting children with a website that will collect their data does not constitute highly offensive behavior,” she wrote.

The judge also sided with the plaintiffs’ arguments that several content creators had notified Google of their concerns that YouTube did not comply with the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act. In their previous complaint, the plaintiffs couldn’t convince the court that the company’s conduct reached highly offensive levels.

In July 2024, the court previously dismissed all the plaintiffs’ claims with only limited leave to amend. The defendant companies moved to dismiss once again in August 2024.

But it wasn’t all wins for the plaintiffs. The judge dismissed all unjust enrichment claims in the case without leave to amend, saying the families hadn’t offered any rebuttal to Google and the channel owner’s defense that they were enriched at their expense.

“The court will dismiss those claims because plaintiffs do not oppose two of defendants’ arguments and accordingly concede the point,” she wrote.

When it came to ruling on Google’s claimed violations of consumer protection statutes, the judge was more nuanced. Van Keulen allowed claims over damages to remain over consumer protection laws from Indiana, Massachusetts and New Hampshire and allowed claims for injunctive relief to remain over laws from Florida, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Hampshire and Tennessee.The judge dismissed all other consumer-protection claims without leave to amend.

The families and their children first filed the class action against Google and the channel owners in 2019, claiming that Google violated the privacy of minors under the age of 13 by collecting personal information while they watched YouTube videos. They claim that the company used the information, which included their IP addresses, device serial numbers, geolocation data and other details, to create individual profiles of individuals to advertise more effectively to minors.

The plaintiffs also accused channel owners of “baiting” vulnerable children by using cartoons, nursery rhymes and other child-directed content to entice them to view YouTube channels to further their goals of collecting data without parental consent.

The families contend they have suffered economic loss and injury from Google’s supposed intrusive behavior and are seeking damages that will be determined at trial. A hearing for the motion took place at the Robert F. Peckham Federal Building and Courthouse on Dec. 17, 2024.

Over the last five years in court, the class action has grown. In their most recent complaint, the plaintiffs brought 42 claims against the companies under the laws of 18 different states.

Although Google doesn’t charge for access to YouTube, the company does use it as a revenue source. It collaborates with advertisers and the owners of popular YouTube channels to advertise on specific videos, with Google and the channel owners splitting the payments received from advertisers.