Austrian Court Dismisses Mass Legal Claims Over Google Fonts Usage

An Austrian hairdresser has successfully defended against a legal claim regarding the use of Google Fonts on his business website, marking a significant precedent for website operators across Austria. The case centers on the alleged unauthorized transmission of personal data to the United States through the integration of Google Fonts, an open-source font library provided by Google and widely used by website developers.

The legal dispute began when the hairdresser, along with approximately 10,000 other website owners, received a formal warning in 2022. The warning, issued by a Lower Austrian lawyer representing a client, demanded a payment of EUR190 per website--comprising EUR100 in damages and EUR90 in legal fees--on grounds of violating data protection regulations. The claim cited the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), asserting that website visitors' personal data had been transferred to the United States without proper consent or safeguards.

Upon receiving the claim, the hairdresser turned to the local Chamber of Commerce for advice. The Chamber recommended withholding payment and pursuing a legal assessment of the situation. This approach led to a test case, with the Chamber supporting the business owner throughout the proceedings. The matter was ultimately brought before the Regional Civil Court in Vienna after the claimant initiated legal action seeking damages and an injunction against the continued use of Google Fonts.

Court documents revealed that the claimant had developed specialized software to automatically visit hundreds of websites, triggering the alleged data transfers. The software's purpose was to generate a high volume of data processing incidents in a short period, thereby creating grounds for mass legal claims under the GDPR. The court found that the claimant's intention was not to assert legitimate data protection rights, but rather to induce website operators to settle the claims and pay the demanded sums.

After nearly three years of litigation, the Vienna court rejected the claim in its entirety. The court concluded that the claimant had abused the provisions of the GDPR by orchestrating automated visits to websites with the aim of securing financial settlements, rather than genuinely seeking to protect personal data. The judgment emphasized that such practices did not constitute a valid exercise of data protection rights under EU law.

While the court's decision is not yet final--an appeal has been announced by the claimant's legal representative--legal experts believe the ruling sets an important benchmark for future cases involving mass data protection claims. The Chamber of Commerce, which provided legal and practical assistance to the defendant during the proceedings, expressed confidence that the decision would be upheld on appeal, citing the clear legal reasoning presented by the court.

The broader implications of the case are significant for businesses and website operators throughout Austria and beyond. As the European Court of Justice continues to examine fundamental questions around data transfers and GDPR compliance, this case underscores the need for clarity on the boundaries of lawful enforcement actions. For now, the ruling provides reassurance to thousands of businesses targeted by similar legal demands, affirming that claims based on automated, mass-generated data processing incidents may not stand up to judicial scrutiny.