In a landmark decision that’s sent ripples through Silicon Valley and beyond, a federal jury in San Francisco has ordered Google to pay $425.7 million in damages for improperly snooping on millions of Americans’ smartphones over nearly a decade. The verdict, delivered on September 3, 2025, comes after a two-week trial that peeled back the curtain on Google’s data practices and raised thorny questions about privacy in the digital age.
The class-action lawsuit, which has been winding its way through the courts for five years, covers a staggering 98 million smartphones used in the United States between July 1, 2016, and September 23, 2024. At its core, the case alleged that Google covertly tracked users’ online activity, even when they believed they had shielded themselves using the company’s own privacy controls. The damages awarded work out to about $4 per affected device—a modest sum per person, but a significant financial and reputational blow for one of the world’s most powerful tech companies.
According to The Associated Press, Google has firmly denied any wrongdoing. The company insists that it did not improperly track people who had activated privacy features and maintains that its tools give users meaningful control over their personal data. In a statement issued the day after the verdict, Google spokesperson Jose Castaneda said, “This decision misunderstands how our products work, and we will appeal it. Our privacy tools give people control over their data, and when they turn off personalization, we honor that choice.”
But the eight-person jury in San Francisco federal court saw things differently. After hearing extensive testimony and reviewing evidence, the jury concluded that Google’s actions amounted to spying in violation of California privacy laws. The crux of the case revolved around whether Google continued to collect data from users who believed they had opted out of such tracking—an issue that’s become increasingly relevant as concerns about digital privacy mount.
The plaintiffs’ legal team, led by attorney John Yanchunis of the law firm Morgan & Morgan, argued that Google had used data gathered from smartphones without users’ explicit consent to fuel its advertising empire. By leveraging this information, they claimed, Google was able to sell ads tailored to individuals’ interests, reaping billions of dollars in additional revenue. The lawyers characterized these practices as illegal profiteering and initially sought damages exceeding $30 billion—a figure that, while far higher than the jury’s final award, underscores the scale of the alleged misconduct.
“We hope this result sends a message to the tech industry that Americans will not sit idly by as their information is collected and monetized against their will,” Yanchunis said after the verdict, according to The Philadelphia Inquirer. For privacy advocates, the outcome represents a rare victory in the ongoing battle to hold technology giants accountable for how they handle the vast troves of data they collect from everyday users.
The case has also shone a spotlight on the murky world of digital advertising, where user data is the lifeblood of targeted marketing. Billions are at stake, and companies like Google have built sprawling business models around the collection and analysis of personal information. The lawsuit contended that, despite providing users with privacy controls, Google continued to harvest data even when those controls were supposedly active—a claim the company hotly contested throughout the proceedings.
While the jury’s award of $425.7 million falls far short of the $30 billion sought by the plaintiffs, it nonetheless marks a significant moment in the ongoing debate over privacy and corporate responsibility. For Google, the verdict is both a legal setback and a public relations challenge, coming at a time when the company is already under intense scrutiny from regulators and lawmakers around the world.
In fact, the timing of the jury’s decision is especially notable. Just one day before the San Francisco verdict, Google managed to sidestep a potentially existential threat in Washington, D.C. There, the U.S. Department of Justice had been pressing to break up the company as part of a landmark antitrust case targeting its dominant search engine. Although a federal judge ultimately declared Google’s search engine to be an illegal monopoly, the remedies imposed were less radical than some had anticipated. Rather than ordering a breakup, the judge required Google to share certain search data with rivals—a move designed to foster competition without completely dismantling the company’s core business.
Still, the antitrust ruling and the privacy verdict together paint a picture of a tech giant facing mounting legal and regulatory pressure on multiple fronts. In the privacy case, the jury’s finding that Google violated California laws adds to a growing list of challenges confronting the company and the broader industry. It also raises questions about whether existing privacy controls are truly effective—or simply give users the illusion of control while data collection continues behind the scenes.
For consumers, the case serves as a wake-up call. Many people rely on privacy features built into their devices and apps, trusting that these settings will protect their personal information from unwanted surveillance. The jury’s verdict suggests that, at least in this instance, that trust may have been misplaced. And with nearly 100 million smartphones affected, the scale of the issue is hard to ignore.
Of course, Google is not taking the verdict lying down. The company has already signaled its intent to appeal, arguing that the jury misunderstood how its products operate and that it has always respected users’ choices when it comes to data collection. The appeals process could drag on for months or even years, leaving the ultimate outcome uncertain.
In the meantime, the case is likely to fuel broader debates about privacy, data protection, and the responsibilities of tech companies in an increasingly connected world. Lawmakers and regulators may seize on the verdict as evidence that stronger oversight is needed, while industry groups could argue that the decision sets a dangerous precedent that could stifle innovation.
What’s clear is that the battle over digital privacy is far from over. As companies continue to push the boundaries of what’s possible—and what’s permissible—in the quest for data-driven profits, users and advocates will be watching closely to see whether the courts, and society at large, are willing to draw firmer lines in the sand.
The Google verdict, modest as it may seem on a per-device basis, has already sent a signal: privacy matters, and even the world’s most powerful tech firms aren’t immune to accountability. Whether that signal leads to lasting change remains to be seen, but for now, the message is unmistakable.
