In re Google Inc. Street View Electronic Communications Litigation
United States District Court for the Northern District of California
794 F. Supp. 2d 1067 (2011)
- Written by Tammy Boggs, JD
Facts
Individuals who were residents of different states (the residents) (plaintiffs) maintained Wi-Fi networks in their homes. The residents used their Wi-Fi connections to send and receive data packets containing payload data, including usernames, passwords, and personal emails. Home Wi-Fi networks use radio waves to transmit data. In 2006, Google, Inc. (defendant) created a data-collection system, known as a wireless sniffer, that sampled, collected, decoded, and analyzed all types of data broadcast through Wi-Fi connections. The wireless sniffer was able to capture data packets, store them on digital media, and decode them using cryptographic or other sophisticated technology. The data packets would not otherwise be readable by the general public. In 2007, in connection with launching a mapping feature called Google Street View, Google directed vehicles equipped with the wireless-sniffer technology to go through the residents’ neighborhoods. Google later admitted that it had collected payload data through its wireless-sniffer-enabled vehicles to improve Google’s location-based services. The residents sued Google, alleging intentional interception of electronic communications in violation of the federal Wiretap Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2511 et seq., among other claims. Google filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that it was entitled to an exemption from liability under 18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(g)(i) (exemption, G1), which allowed for interceptions of electronic communications if the communication was readily accessible to the general public.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Ware, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 834,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.