Roley v. Google, LLC

Facts

D created its 'Local Guides' program to improve its Google Maps and Google Earth. Those who sign up to be local guides share photographs, comments, reviews, and the like about various establishments and locations in their communities, which benefits D through increased page views and advertising revenue. D offered guides a free terabyte of data storage for those who achieved 'Level 4 status' in the program. P received an email from Google inviting him to join the Local Guides program. The email provided, in part: 

Get rewards for the photos you've shared.

When you become a Local Guide, you earn points for your photos and other contribution, to Google Maps, These points can unlock cool benefits like

        - 1TB of Google Drive storage

        - invitations to exclusive events

        - Early access to new Google products

        - Local Guides badge

    You've already earned points with your photos. Why not join our community of explorers today?

GET STARTED

P wanted that terabyte of free data storage, P joined the program and received an email acknowledging his enrollment. P had to agree to the program's rules. The Terms purport to give D wide discretion with respect to providing benefits to local guides. Specifically, the Terms state the following: (1) 'Level requirements and descriptions are subject to change, at D's sole discretion;' (2) 'Benefits are offered at the discretion of D and its affiliates;' and (3) 'Benefits are subject to change.' P really wanted that free data storage and D egged him on teasing him with how many more photos he needed to “level up now and get more exclusive benefits.' It all came crashing down when on July 7, 2016, D emailed P stating that it would be 'adjusting its Level 4 benefit to 100 GB of free Google Drive storage,' but that 'Local Guides who reach Level 4 in the next 2 weeks can still unlock the original offer of 1TB of free Drive storage.' On July 14, 2016, within the two-week time frame, D provided, Roley achieved Level 4 status, and D notified him that he could redeem his Google Drive storage. D alleges that it informed him that his free storage would last only two years, but P alleges this is not true. Two years later D canceled the free storage and noticed P he would have to begin paying monthly for his terabyte of storage. D wanted $10/month. P believed it would always be free. P alleges that no reasonable consumer would have understood that the offer of free storage was time-limited to two years. P alleges that D intentionally failed to disclose this time limit (and thus misrepresented the benefit) in an effort to induce P and members of the putative class to sign up for Local Guides to the benefit of D. P brought a class action for breach of contract and misrepresentation. D moved to dismiss under 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted 'tests the legal sufficiency of a claim.'

Issues

Rule of Law

Holding and Decision

Legal Analysis

© 2007-2024 ABN Study Partner.