[mindslight]

> 2. The lawsuit alleges that there was no legal requirement or court order. Even if there had been, the lawsuit argues that the conduct would still have violated federal and state law and constitutions.

I would think the lack of a legal requirement or court order would actually absolve Massachusetts, as it would leave the responsibility resting on Google. Surely within the terms of Play store etc, Google has the power to do anything they'd like to your device and personal information. And that power extends to Google's actions when working with other parties.

I'm most definitely not a fan of mass surveillance or centralized control. But running an operating system developed by a surveillance company, to which they have multiple backdoors and frontdoors, is fundamentally a surrender to these terrible things.

The main thing that makes this different than every other Google update is that the government of Massachusetts was also involved, for a "greater good" public health purpose rather than the usual lucre.

Now, if we had real privacy protection (either legislative or common law) to the point that processing individuals' private information were illegal, even regardless of any contracts purporting the opposite, then there could be a claim. But something tells me this suit isn't looking to go that far.