Google is demanding a federal judge grant it permission to appeal a decision that approved a federal wiretapping lawsuit over its interception of unencrypted Wi-Fi traffic.

The Mountain View, California, media giant responded late Friday to a Silicon Valley federal judge’s June 29 decision in nearly a dozen combined lawsuits seeking damages from Google for eavesdropping on open, unencrypted Wi-Fi networks from its Street View mapping cars. The vehicles, which rolled through neighborhoods across the country, were equipped with Wi-Fi–sniffing hardware to record the names and MAC addresses of routers to improve Google location-specific services. But the cars also secretly gathered snippets of Americans’ data.

Google claims it is was not a breach of the Wiretap Act to intercept data from unencrypted, or non-password-protected Wi-Fi networks. Google said open Wi-Fi networks are akin to “radio communications” like AM/FM radio, citizens’ band and police and fire bands, and are “readily accessible” to the general public — a position rejected by U.S. District Judge James Ware.

“Google takes a different view,” Google attorney Michael Ruben wrote Ware in the new filing.

It was the first ruling (.pdf) of its kind, and Google wants the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to review Ware’s decision “before forcing it to proceed with protracted litigation at the district court,” Ruben wrote.

He added that Ware’s ruling “addresses novel questions of law and applies them to new technologies in ways which reasonable judges could disagree.”

Judge Ware’s ruling is important not only to Google, but to the millions who use open, unencrypted Wi-Fi networks at coffee shops, restaurants or any other business that tries to attract customers by providing Wi-Fi. The decision comes on the heels of a Federal Trade Commission antitrust probe into Google’s search and ad businesses, as well as a Federal Communications Commission ongoing inquiry into the Street View debacle.

Google said it didn’t realize it was sniffing packets of data on unsecured Wi-Fi networks in about a dozen countries over a three-year period until German privacy authorities began questioning last year what data Google’s Street View cars were collecting. Google, along with other companies, use databases of Wi-Fi networks and their locations to augment or replace GPS when attempting to figure out the location of a computer or mobile device.

Google told the public the affair was a “mistake,” and that it only collected “fragments” of data as its Street View cars drove through neighborhoods. Google said it has not reviewed the data, which now remains under courthouse lock and key.

Lawyers behind the Google lawsuits, which seek class action status, did not immediately respond for comment. Ruben, however, wrote in a declaration to Judge Ware that those lawyers “do not agree that the June 29, 2011 order should be certified for immediate appeal.”

Because the case before Ware is not final and is in its infancy, Ware must OK what is known as an “interlocutory” appeal to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the appellate court with jurisdiction over California and other western states.

Even if not authorized by Ware, Google could ask the San Francisco-based appeals court to review the decision. Under those circumstances, though, appellate courts are loathe to hear appeals.

Photo: dspain/Flickr

See Also: