Slashdot Mirror


Court Date Set for Google Lawsuit

Jason Jardine wrote to mention a C|Net story giving the date and location for Google's court case with the government. From the article: "Google's attempt to fend off the government's request for millions of search terms will move to a federal court in San Jose, Calif., on Feb. 27. U.S. District Judge James Ware on Thursday set the date for the highly anticipated hearing, which is expected to determine whether the U.S. Justice Department will prevail in its fight to force Google to help it defend an anti-pornography law this fall."

5 of 209 comments (clear)

  1. Google should comply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    They should supply a list of URLs that google has indexed.

    The list should be in the form of 0 byte length files where the filename is the URL -- on a FAT partition.

    When the DOJ asks why all they see is millions of files named "http:/~1" google should point them to the FAT long filenames patents.

    Fran

  2. Re:Interesting Point by ranton · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I hate how short sided people can be when they have their mind made up about something. Cooperating with the Chinese government was not as "evil" as the Slashdot crowd would like you to believe.

    Google had two options:

    1) Refuse China's request, therefore reducing the average Chinese citizen's access to information on the internet greatly.

    2) Comply with China's request, therefore helping the average Chinese citizen access information while only restricting their access slightly. In addition, they can have a message that notifies them that sites are being blocked for political reasons.

    In my opinion, it would have been "evil" of Google to not comply with China's request. It would be the same as refusing to give food to North Korea because you do not like their government. I do not think letting millions of people starve would be the best approach to overthrowing the North Korean government. I also do not think the best way to liberate China from their oppressive regime is to isolate them even further.

    --

    --
    -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
  3. Re:You kidding me? by RingDev · · Score: 5, Funny

    Google is resisting a subpoena.

    It like went like this:
    Feds: Give us your records
    Google: No
    Feds: We'll sue you!
    Google: We're shaking in our booties
    Feds: [thwap] subpoena!
    Google: Hey ACLU, the Feds want your search history!
    ACLU: F' You feds!
    Feds: Hey Judge, they said no :( [pouty face]
    Judge: All right ass hats, get in here.

    -Rick

    --
    "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
  4. Slavery by MikeRT · · Score: 5, Interesting

    They are asking Google to pay for this part of their lawsuit to protect the COPA law at their own expense. Google gets nothing out of it. I'm sure that Google could have been paid a few hundred thousand dollars to write a test suite to prove the DoJ's case. One Google engineer could have written a script that would have given them millions of results based on simulating actual search queries.

    Yet the DoJ didn't want to be bothered to have to pay for this. This is slavery because they are forcing someone to work for their benefit without compensation or as a form of restitution for a crime against their life or property. There is no middle ground here. The DoJ is in the wrong because they refused to pay for the data they wanted and attempted to extort it using the force of law.

  5. Re:You kidding me? by tribentwrks · · Score: 5, Funny

    Finally someone explains politics in a way I can understand it! You should write a book explaining everything this way.