Google Agreed to Pay $68 Million in Class Action Settlement Over Google Assistant Privacy Violation, Pending Approval

Google has agreed to pay $68 million in a lawsuit settlement that claims that the Google assistant was recording private conversations illegally on smartphones, so that they could better target the smartphone owner with ads. It recorded private conversations without being alerted with the activation phrase, "Hey Google."

Google agreed to pay $68 million in a settlement

Google Will Pay Out $68 Million Over Privacy Lawsuit involving Assistant

Google has agreed to pay out a total of $68 million USD to smartphone users that had voice-activated Google assistant and their privacy was violated when it recorded users for targeted ads without the activation words, "Hey Google."

Reuters reported that U.S. District Judge Beth Labson Freeman must approve the class action settlement that was filed 23 January, 2026, and therefore is in "pending approval" status.

According to Reuters, "users objected to receiving ads after Google Assistant misperceived what they said in hot words, known as 'false accepts.'"

Google has settled without acknowledging wrongdoing. this is to avoid cost, risk, and uncertainty of litigation, according to court papers. Those affected and subject to "false accepts" since May 18, 2016, are covered or "eligible" class action members of this settlement. Eligible users may file claims for up to 3 devices.

Out of the $68 million, the lawyers for plaintiffs "may seek up to one-third of the fund, or about $22.7 million" for their legal fees.

Do you suspect that Google Assistant on your smartphone recorded any of your private conversations in order to target you with ads?

Tampa Bay News: Google Agrees to Pay $68 Million in Privacy Lawsuit 

Sources:

Stempel, Jonathan. "Google settles Google Assistant privacy lawsuit for $68 million." Reuters.com. 26 January 2026.

Tampa Bay News. "Google Agrees to Pay $68 Million in Privacy Lawsuit Settlement." 27 January 2026.

Austrian Cow Given a Deck Broom Scratches Her Own Back, Making 'The First Documented Case of Cattle Using Tools'

In Austria, there is a cow that figured out she can scratch her own back after she was given a broom. Researchers studied the cow and confirmed the use of a tool after 70 trials.

Veronika the Austrian cow scratching her back with a broom

One cow no longer needs to wait for its human owner to give it a good back scratch. In fact, she has been improving her technique for at least nine years.

Austrian Cow Can Scratch Her Own Back with a Deck Broom

Meet Veronika, a 13-year-old Swiss brown cow in Austria that knows how to pick up a broom and use it to scratch her own back, making her a very intelligent cow.

According to Smithsonian Magazine, Veronika is the "first documented case of cattle using tools like humans."

Her owner, Witgar, says that Veronika has been doing this for at least nine years now, and it first started out with tree branches. She has also figured out how to use different parts of the broom depending on the location and severity of any given itch. 

Scientists Studied Veronika Using a Tool for 70 Trials & Published the Findings

Antonio Osuna-Mascaró and Alice Auersperg, two scientists from the University of Veterinary Medicine in Vienna studied Veronika, noting that the cow chose when to switch between the broom handle and the bristles on the head of the broom, depending on the area it was trying to scratch.

When the scientists first heard about Veronika, they wanted to come see it for themselves and in fact studied Veronika over 70 trials. They were able to confirm that Veronika, the cow, was intentionally using a broom to achieve a specific goal. Their findings were published in the journal, Current Biology, on January 19, 2026.

Osuna-Mascaró said that "Veronika is very friendly" and "has a close bond with Witgar...not only does Witgar prepare and sell bread, he also distributes it around the area. It was interesting to see Veronika watching every passing car with interest and trying to guess if the driver was Witgar...if she thought it was him, she would 'Moo' with all her might."

Osuna-Mascaró said this:

"There are about 1.5 billion cows and bulls in the world, and we are only now starting to recognize that they are able to use tools."

Quote from researcher on cows using tools

He also said:

"Perhaps the real absurdity lies not in imagining a tool-using cow, but in assuming such a thing could never exist." -Antonio Osuna-Mascaró

VIDEO: Inside Edition "Cow Uses Broom To Scratch Her Own Back in Austria"

Inside Edition posted the video story (seen below) about Veronika using a broom to scratch her own back.

VIDEO: "Flexible use of a multi-purpose tool by a cow"

The next video was published by the scientists Antonio Osuna-Mascaró and Alice Auersperg.

Video Credit: Antonio Osuna-Mascaró and Alice Auersperg

Sources: 

Current Biology. "Flexible use of a multi-purpose tool by a cow." 19 January 2026.

Inside Edition on YouTube, reported by Mara Montalbano

Fossbytes on Facebook.

Smithsonian Magazine. "A Cow Named Veronika Can Scratch Her Back With a Broom. Watch the Video Scientists are Calling the First Documented Evidence of Cattle Using Tools." 20 January 2026.

Well Known Videographer Records Dorito Shaped Aircraft Flying at Area 51 Military Base

Anders Otteson recorded a triangular-shaped aircraft flying over Area 51 in Nevada on January 14, 2026 after recording a B-2 Spirit stealth bomber earlier the same night.

Dorito shaped aircraft seen over Nevada desert

It's one thing to think that you are seeing things. It's another thing to know that you just recorded something that the world needs to see, even if it is at a limited resolution over a military base.

Triangular "Dorito-shaped" Aircraft Filmed over Area 51

Anders Otteson, known for his YouTube Channel, Uncanny Expeditions, recorded a strange, triangular-shaped aircraft flying over Area 51 in the same night he recorded a B-2 Spirit stealth bomber. He notes that the aircraft he saw has a "flatter trailing edge" with "no visible wings" and a "jagged rear section." 

The New York Post reported about the incident, which Otteson filmed around 3 a.m. on January 14, 2026. He said the triangular sighting reminded him of similar "Dorito shaped" aircraft spotted over Southern California. 

Was it a classified aircraft that the U.S. owns, or was it of otherworldly origins?

Excellent question. Otteson said:

"Are we looking at a classified test flight or run-of-the-mill training sortie? I certainly think we have something interesting here."

On January 15, Otteson connected with UFO researcher Joerg Amu, who shared scanner audio from the B-2 bomber flight hours earlier at the military base, and it seemed highly unusual with all of the interesting lingo being tossed around.

Some of the strange terms heard in the recorded audio included: 

• "Imperial with garlic"
• "Pretzel snack"
• "Fridge hydrate"
• "Profile Michelob" 

VIDEO: Unusual Activity in the Sky at AREA 51

The YouTuber's video capturing the triangular aircraft can be seen below:

What would you do if you captured footage of a UAP or UFO?

Ireland's The Business Post Reports that Coca-Cola Transferred 4.4 Billion Euros from Ireland to the Cayman Islands to 'Pay Dividends,' with Less U.S. Taxes Paid

The Business Post has reported new details on Coca-Cola's evasive tax strategy paying €4.4 billion in dividends to a Cayman Islands entity, already scrutinized by U.S. Tax Court, which indicated that Coca-Cola owes around $6 billion in back taxes and interest. 

Money Sent to Cayman Islands

The IRS is Investigating Coca-Cola's Offshore Tax Strategy

The Business Post reported that a significant amount dividends was paid to an entity in the Cayman Islands, and these dividends were paid from its Irish office - an office being scrutinized by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS). According to the article, the IRS is "probing whether Coca-Cola had moved profits from its U.S. tax base and allocated it to its Irish Operation, which then paid the money to the Cayman Islands, an offshore entity.

Yahoo! Finance reported that U.S. Tax Court found that Coca-Cola has hidden "astronomical levels" of profits in low-tax jurisdictions - one of which being Ireland - and that Coca-Cola owes the IRS about $6 billion USD. The other subsidiary named was it's Brazil subsidiary, which together could result in a combined $16 billion owed to the U.S.

Yahoo! Finance reported:

"The Irish subsidiary's tax rate tells a striking story. Back in 2017, the company paid a mere 1.32% on what it earned from operations. That rate rose to 7.88% by 2023 but fell again to 5.87% last year after the company claimed over 239 million euros ($280 million) in tax relief." -Leslie Sattler of Yahoo! Finance

Per the Business Post article, this is not the first time Coca-Cola's Irish subsidiary has been involved in a tax dispute with the U.S. 

The U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has been disputing Coca-Cola’s transfer pricing arrangements involving its Irish operation going back at least to the mid-2010s, with formal litigation and major rulings tied to profit allocations for tax years as early as 2007–2009. The IRS designated the case for litigation in 2015, kick-starting a long-running dispute over whether profits were artificially shifted offshore to subsidiaries in low-tax jurisdictions, including Ireland.

Reported by The Irish Times:

A U.S. Tax Court judgment from 2020 highlighted that Coca-Cola had manipulated profit allocations to its Irish unit—among others—leading to an extremely low effective tax rate and prompting orders for billions in back taxes and interest. This has been part of a long-running tax fight covering roughly a decade and continuing into appeals and related scrutiny. 

CFO: "The Company is Confident"

Chief Financial Officer John Murphy said the company is confident.

"We have outside counsel who have, each quarter, continued to evaluate the case on the facts that are available to them, and they continue to offer an opinion that gives us a greater-than-not chance of prevailing," he said.

Should Companies Like Coca-Cola Pay a Flat 15% Global Minimum Tax Rate?

To make things fair across the board, some believe that a global minimum tax rate should be instituted for all international companies. That way, large corporations could not have an option to evade taxes by moving revenues to overseas operations or offshore entities.

Yahoo! Finance also reported:

"What's being done about corporate tax avoidance?

More than 140 countries have agreed to a 15% global minimum corporate tax through the OECD, an effort meant to close loopholes that let companies shift profits to havens.

Meanwhile, the U.S. continues pursuing its case against Coca-Cola, with the company fighting the ruling on appeal."

How Eligible Amazon Prime Customers can Claim Money from the $2.5 Billion Amazon Settlement

Amazon allegedly "enrolled tens of millions of customers in Amazon Prime subscriptions without their knowledge or consent," and "made it difficult for customers to cancel their Amazon Prime subscriptions." As a result, Amazon agreed to pay out $2.5 billion to eligible Amazon Prime customers.

Eligible Amazon Prime Customers: What You Can Expect

According to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Amazon began sending claim notices to eligible Amazon Prime customers in January 2026.

Amazon is required to pay out $1.5 billion for refunds to customers that were affected by its "unlawful" Amazon Prime enrollment and cancellation practices and is also required to pay $1 billion civic penalty and stop the unlawful enrollment and cancellation practices (Source: FTC).

Requirements to Get a Refund from the Amazon Prime Settlement

Eligible Amazon Prime customers can receive up to $51.00 USD under the settlement agreement.

Here are the requirements to be eligible:

1. You are an Amazon Prime customer in the United States.

2. You signed up for Amazon Prime subscription through a "challenged enrollment flow" or tried to cancel through the online cancellation flow but were unable to do so between June 23, 2019 and June 23, 2025.

3. You used no more than (3) Amazon Prime benefits (including Prime Music or Prime Video products offered for free to Prime subscribers) in any 12-month period following Amazon Prime enrollment.

In January 2026, Amazon began sending claim notices to eligible Amazon Prime customers who did not receive an automatic refund from November 2025 to December 2025. The claim notice provides instructions on how to file a claim.

It is important to understand that the FTC will not ask or be involved with your refund, and if someone claiming to be from the FTC contacts you, this is likely a scammer.

If you are eligible, you will receive a claim form by mail or email.

On the claim form, the eligible Amazon Prime customer selects the method of how they would like their refund. It can be by check, PayPal or Venmo.

Joybird Owned by La-Z-Boy Agreed to Pay 7.15 Million in Class Action Lawsuit Settlement

A consumer filed a class action lawsuit in federal court in California, claiming that La-Z-Boy discounts are falsely advertised on its website joybird.com. In the lawsuit, the plaintiff alleges that the original prices being shown on the website are "false reference prices that no consumer pays." 

A Class Action Lawsuit was Filed Against La-Z-Boy 

Plaintiff Jeffrey Jacobs filed a class action lawsuit against La-Z-Boy - which owns joybird.com - after claiming in the lawsuit that "original" prices are being "falsely advertised" on the website, and that "no consumer pays these original prices."

This class action lawsuit is Jacobs v. La-Z-Boy Inc., Case No. 2:24-cv-04446 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Jeffrey Jacobs is represented by Todd D. Carpenter, Scott G. Braden and James B. Drimmer of Lynch Carpenter LLP.

Jacob states in the lawsuit, “The resulting artificial price disparity misleads consumers into believing the product they are buying has a higher market value, and it induces them into purchasing the product,” the La-Z-Boy class action says. “This practice artificially inflates the market price for these products by raising consumers’ internal reference price and in turn the perceived value consumers ascribe to these products.”

According to TopClassActions.com, the La-Z-Boy discounts are a violation of the California Unfair Competition Law, California's False Advertising Law, and California's Consumer Legal Remedies Act.

The class action lawsuit is asking for damages and restitution from La-Z-Boy's falsely earned profits, and injunctive relief against La-Z-Boy.

Jacob also states:

“This deceptive marketing practice gave consumers the false impression that the products were regularly sold on the market for a substantially higher price than they actually were; therefore, leading to the false impression that the products sold at joybird.com and Joybird retail stores were worth more than they actually were.”

La-Z-Boy Agreed to Pay $7.15 Million to Eligible Consumers

Joybird, (owned by La-Z-Boy) agreed to a $7.15 million class action lawsuit settlement to resolve these claims. The settlement benefits consumers in the states California, Oregon, and Washington who purchased one or more La-Z-Boy products on Joybird.com or at a physical Joybird store location at a sale price between December 18, 2019 and October 31, 2025.

Eligible class members can receive a $115 benefit that can be redeemed as either a cash payment or a store credit voucher. Those that choose the store credit voucher must redeem the voucher within two years after distribution. The voucher can be redeemed online or in-store.

The deadline for exclusion and objection is February 13, 2026.

How to Sign up for the Joybird Class Action Lawsuit Settlement

How do I sign up for the Joybird La-Z-Boy class action settlement online?

The website with the claim form is found here. A screenshot of that website is seen below. A claim number and PIN will be required to log in, which you should have received by mail or e-mail.

Joybird Settlement website - https://jacobslazyboyjoybird.claims-administrator.com/

Are you eligible for the La-Z-Boy class action lawsuit settlement?