The DPC inquiry was prompted by research by the Norwegian consumer agency in 2018<\/a> which suggested location data could reveal details such as religious beliefs (by tracking places of worship), political leanings (for example knowing a user has gone to demonstrations), health conditions (if a user has gone to hospital) and sexual orientation (if they have gone to certain bars).<\/p>\n The DPC launched its inquiry six years ago and set out to find out whether Google had a valid legal basis for its use of location data.<\/p>\n It found that Google users could have been unaware that their location was being used to influence them with adverts or to gather details about their health and interests.<\/p>\n \u201cLocation data is a type of personal data which is processed by way of location tracking, and includes data collected or processed by Google, which by itself or in conjunction with other information an individual\u2019s location can be inferred,\u201d said Graham Doyle, a deputy commissioner at the DPC.<\/p>\n \u201cLocation data can bring both benefits and harms to individuals.<\/p>\n \u201cIt can greatly enhance the utility of online services, but it can also reveal a significant amount of information about an individual, including information that is inherently private,\u201d Doyle added.<\/p>\n Responding to the DPC\u2019s ruling, a Google spokeperson said: \u201cThis case centres around historical policies that have since been updated. From 2019 onwards, we\u2019ve significantly evolved our practices and launched robust tools that make managing location data simple.\u201d<\/p>\n The European Consumer Organisation (BEUC) based its complaint on research by the Forbrukerr\u00e5det, the Norwegian consumer agency, which claimed Google used \u201cvarious tricks\u201d<\/a> to ensure location history and web and app activity were enabled.<\/p>\n \u201cToday marks an important milestone in the effort to protect our rights online. People must be able to understand what they are agreeing to without being deceived or manipulated into making choices they otherwise would never have made,\u201d says Finn Myrstad, director of digital policy at the Norwegian Consumer Council.<\/p>\n BEUC said that geolocation data was \u201cone of the most invasive forms of consumer surveillance\u201d.<\/p>\n Agust\u00edn Reyna, director general of BEUC, welcomed the ruling but said \u201cthe time needed to come to this conclusion is disproportionate with the seriousness of the infringement\u201d arguing \u201clate enforcement can be as harmful as no enforcement at all\u201d.<\/p>\n The DPC inquiry looked at \u201cweb and app activity\u201d, \u201clocation history\u201d and \u201clocation accuracy\u201d between 25 May 2018 and 4 February 2020.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/1789997652_920_500.jpg\")
<\/p>\n