Glenn Fleishman (wireless network expert) has taken the time to completely read and analyze the class-action suit against google for collecting public data from wi-fi networks and tears it to pieces:You're broadcasting data in an unlicensed band. You have no reasonable expectation of privacy over openly broadcast data.In my opinion google should not have collected this data. It still sounds like installing kismet and forgetting to configure it completely. Google should wipe this data immediately. Not hand it over to any law enforcement because law enforcement should not have this data either, it should be wiped thoroughly. But starting a stupid lawsuit with falsehoods and lies like:9. In 2006, Google generated programming code that sampled and decoded all categories of publicly broadcast WiFi data. This type or class of program is commonly called a packet analyzer, also known as a network analyzer, protocol analyzer or packet sniffer, or for particular types of networks, an Ethernet sniffer or wireless sniffer ("wireless sniffer"). As data streams flow across the wireless network, the sniffer secretly captures each packet (or discreet package) of information, then decrypts / decodes and analyzes its content according to the appropriate specifications.I get worked up just having to point out the lies and false acquisations in this part. I really hope this suit by Vicki van Valin and Neil Mertz backfires on them.
10. To view data secretly captured by a wireless sniffer in readable or viewable form, after being captured and stored on digital media, it must then be decoded using crypto-analysis or similar programming or technology. Because the data "as captured" by the wireless sniffer is typically not readable by the public absent sophisticated decoding or processing, it is reasonably considered and understood to be private, protected information by users and operators of home- based WiFi systems.