The ICO has subsequently come under fire from various privacy groups for its decision not to issue a punishment. "The information commissioner's failure to take action is disgraceful," Alex Deane, director of Big Brother Watch, told IT PRO. Deane accused the commissioner of being a "paper tiger" and "an apologist for the worst offender in his sphere of responsibility, not a policeman of it." Jim Killock, executive director at the Open Rights Group, said he was "shocked" by the ICO's decision.
"They are behaving like a lapdog, not a watchdog," Killock added.
"Every privacy group in the UK is appalled. It's time for the ICO to sharpen up..."
In response to the criticism, an ICO spokesperson noted most of the pay-load data was collected before 6 April 2010, when the ICO's new powers came into force.
"Monetary penalties can only be served when a strict set of criteria is satisfied, including that the breach was likely to cause substantial harm or substantial distress this alone would be very hard to prove in this case," the spokesperson added.
Google itself has come under heavy criticism across the globe, but is yet to be hit with any form of financial penalty.
