A divided federal appeals court has upheld a decision that allows Google to continue consumer privacy violations by means of a collusive settlement. Though the case concerns Google's illegal disclosure of personal data from 129 million consumers, the settlement fails to compensate those consumers, does nothing to change Google's business practices, and diverts funds to organizations that don’t protect consumer privacy. The dissenting judge wrote that the settlement "raises a red flag" because "47% of the settlement fund is being donated to the alma maters of class counsel." EPIC twice urged the lower court to reject the settlement, arguing that it did nothing for class members and would allow Google to "continue to engage in the privacy-invading practice." EPIC has long urged courts to reject collusive settlements and has proposed objective criteria for courts to follow in class action cases.
Facing public outrage, the Department of Justice has rescinded a demand for over 1.3 million IP logs associated with Inauguration Day protests. DreamHost challenged the warrant, which required the web hosting service to turn over practically all records about disruptj20.org, a protest website. The Justice Department warrant could have identified protestors, threatened First Amendment protections, and violated the Fourth Amendment. After widespread opposition, the DOJ narrowed the demand to exclude visitor logs and unpublished content, such as posts and emails. EPIC opposed the DOJ's demand as it had in an earlier case involving Google search histories. EPIC also recently an amicus brief in the Supreme Court urging the Court to safeguard the First Amendment right to access information online free of government surveillance.
EPIC has appealed a federal district court ruling that allowed the Presidential Election Commission to move forward with a controversial plan to gather state voter data in a White House database. EPIC told the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals that the Commission was obligated to undertake a Privacy Impact Assessment before amassing voters’ personal information. EPIC's case, which led the Commission to suspend the collection of voter data in July, after EPIC's lawsuit revealed agency incompetence, is before the D.C. Circuit on an expedited basis. The case is EPIC v. Commission, No. 17-5171 (D.C. Cir. filed July 27, 2017).
