• by Wendy Davis , Yesterday

A federal judge has granted preliminary approval to a proposed settlement requiring Google to pay $30 million to resolve class-action claims that it violated children's privacy by tracking their YouTube activity in order to serve targeted ads.

In an order issued Wednesday, U.S. Magistrate Judge Susan van Keulen in San Jose said the deal warrants preliminary approval for several reasons -- including that it reflects the parties' evaluation of the strength of the legal issues, and would result in immediate cash payments to class members who submit claims.

By contrast, the judge wrote, "continued litigation and any trial and appeal would entail significant risk, an uncertain outcome, and further delay."

If the deal is granted final approval, it will resolve a battle that began in 2019, when California resident Nicole Hubbard sued YouTube and various channel operators -- including Cartoon Network, DreamWorks, Mattel and Hasbro -- on behalf of her 5-year-old child, who viewed YouTube channels aimed at young children.

Hubbard's complaint, later joined by other parents, came soon after Google agreed to pay $170 million to settle with the Federal Trade Commission and New York Attorney General over charges that YouTube wrongly collected data via tracking cookies from viewers younger than 13.

The FTC's complaint claimed Google violated the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act -- a federal law that prohibits companies from collecting data from children under 13 without parental consent.

The class-action complaint claimed Google engaged in activity such as "intrusion upon seclusion" -- meaning that the company violated privacy in a "highly offensive" way.

In January, Google lost a key battle in the case when van Keulen rejected the company's argument that the allegations against it, even if proven true, wouldn't show that the companies' conduct was “highly offensive.”

Google had argued that the alleged data collection and use couldn't be considered highly offensive because the practice was disclosed and involved data elements routinely captured as part of internet browsing activity.”

Van Keulen disagreed with Google, ruling that if the allegations in the complaint were proven true, they could show that Google “engaged in highly offensive conduct.”

Earlier in the proceedings, U.S. District Court Judge Beth Labson Freeman in San Jose dismissed the case, ruling that the lawsuit was foreclosed by the federal Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, which only authorizes suits by the FTC and attorneys general. That law prohibits web companies from knowingly collecting personal data from children under 13, without parental consent.

In 2023, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated the case, ruling that the federal children's privacy law doesn't prevent people from bringing private lawsuits for related claims rooted in state laws -- such as intrusion upon seclusion.

Van Keulen is expected to hold a further hearing on January 13, after which she will decide whether to grant the deal final approval.