Google Street View Wifi Collection Case Finally Headed to Trial Court


The US Supreme has refused to consider Google’s claim that when Street View collected unencrypted Wifi data between 2007 and 2010 that it was “readily accessible to the general public” so the collection was not a violation of the Wiretap Act” which claim was rejected in December 2013 by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) filed an amicus brief in support of Internet users and stated:

This case involves the intentional interception of electronic communications sent over home Wi-Fi networks. The intercepted data includes personal information and communications – passwords, e-mails, financial records, and other documents – that individuals consider extremely private.

The fact that this data was transferred over a wireless network does not change its private nature. Internet users are constantly at risk of cyber attacks and exploits, but they still retain their right in law to communicate privately across computer networks.

The Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 (“ECPA”) ensures the privacy of these communications, and its protections should not be interpreted in an unfair and inconsistent way.

Now the class action suit is headed to the trial court in the California, and it will be interesting to follow since other countries around the world have held against Google.

The publications contained in this site do not constitute legal advice. Legal advice can only be given with knowledge of the client's specific facts. By putting these publications on our website we do not intend to create a lawyer-client relationship with the user. Materials may not reflect the most current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. This information should in no way be taken as an indication of future results.

Search Tips:

You may use the wildcard symbol (*) as a root expander.  A search for "anti*" will find not only "anti", but also "anti-trust", "antique", etc.

Entering two terms together in a search field will behave as though an "OR" is being used.  For example, entering "Antique Motorcars" as a Client Name search will find results with either word in the Client Name.


AND and OR may be used in a search.  Note: they must be capitalized, e.g., "Project AND Finance." 

The + and - sign operators may be used.  The + sign indicates that the term immediately following is required, while the - sign indicates to omit results that contain that term. E.g., "+real -estate" says results must have "real" but not "estate".

To perform an exact phrase search, surround your search phrase with quotation marks.  For example, "Project Finance".

Searches are not case sensitive.

back to top