leads me to believe that Google has PI when people visit sites using google fonts.
Even if they don't use it for advertising purposes long term log keeping is not required to serve fonts.
It doesn't really matter what the service is doing, they didn't ask for consent to log the IP of people downloading fonts.
To be perfectly clear: it wouldn't keep me from sleeping at night and fonts permissions should be bundled with cookie consent or there should be a permission prompt (just like when asking for youtube vid.).
"by including Google-Fonts-hosted font on its pages, passed the unidentified plaintiff's IP address to Google without authorization and without a legitimate reason for doing so"
It isn't about whether the IP address was logged, but about whether it was sent. Which is an unavoidable aspect of loading a resource from a server.
Secure from whom? The mob? China? The US government? Google?
I'm more worried about the last two than the first two. It'd be illegal for them to secure it against US law enforcement, and they don't claim they're secure the data they log against access from themselves.
and https://www.theregister.com/2022/01/31/website_fine_google_f...
leads me to believe that Google has PI when people visit sites using google fonts.
Even if they don't use it for advertising purposes long term log keeping is not required to serve fonts.
It doesn't really matter what the service is doing, they didn't ask for consent to log the IP of people downloading fonts.
To be perfectly clear: it wouldn't keep me from sleeping at night and fonts permissions should be bundled with cookie consent or there should be a permission prompt (just like when asking for youtube vid.).