Google Can’t Escape ‘Free’ Drive Storage Class Action Lawsuit

Google must face a class action lawsuit filed last year over the company’s practice of putting a time limit on the free Google Drive storage space allegedly promised to Local Guides.

Last week, U.S. District Judge Beth Labson Freeman decided to not dismiss the Goggle Drive class action lawsuit, denying Google’s request to do so.

According to Judge Freeman, consumers presented enough evidence to support their allegations that Google did make a binding offer with its Local Guides to give them a free terabyte of storage, and went back on that offer by putting a time limit on how long the storage would be free.

“If Google could simply choose not to confer promised benefits after full performance by the consumer, it would have no duty to perform under contract,” Judge Freeman wrote.

The Google Drive space class action lawsuit was filed in 2018 by Andrew Roley, who says that he worked as a Local Guide for Google, helping the company to enhance the quality of products like Google Maps and Google Earth by providing “local knowledge” of locations in his area.

Allegedly, Roley did not do this for monetary payment, but instead did this for promised gifts from Google that were given to him after he performed a certain amount of work as a Local Guide.

Roley says that Local Guides are assigned “levels” based on how much work they do and are given prizes as they reach new levels.

According to the Google class action, Roley agreed to be a Local Guide in part because he was promised that when he reached the status of a Level Four local guide, he would receive a free terabyte of Google Drive storage space.

However, Roley says that after he attained Level 4 status, he was enforced that the free storage would only last two years, and that after two years, he would have to pay $10 per month to maintain his storage space.

The Google Drive class action lawsuit claims that Roley did not receive information from the company beforehand informing him that the terabyte of space would not always be free.

Judge Freeman disagreed with Google’s argument that the terms of the Local Guide agreement and the information shared with Roley gave the company “blank discretion” to terminate or change promised benefits at any time.

Google attempted to have Roley’s claims dismissed, in particular taking issue with Roley’s fraud claim. The tech giant argued that Roley’s reliance on marketing materials around the Local Guide prizes was unreasonable. Judge Freeman disagreed with this argument, preserving the fraud claim.

She also denied Google’s attempts to have other claims trashed — claims that the company violated California’s Unfair Competition Law and the Consumers Legal Remedies Act.

Roley is represented by Christian Schreiber and Monique Olivier of Olivier Schreiber & Chao LLP, Robert K. Shelquist, Rebecca A. Peterson and Stephanie A. Chen of Lockridge Grindal Nauen PLLP, Vildan A. Teske and Marisa C. Katz of Teske Katz Kitzer & Rochel PLLP, and Seth Leventhal of Leventhal PLLC.

The Google Maps Local Guides Data Storage Class Action Lawsuit is Andrew Roley v. Google LLC, Case No. 5:18-cv-07537, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Read More Lawsuit & Settlement News:

I Can’t Believe It’s Not Butter Class Action Says Cooking Spray Isn’t ‘0 Calories’

What are the Symptoms of Dilantin Toxicity?

Rawlings Wants Weighted Baseball Bats Class Action Dismissed

Is Essure Made Out of Nickel?