Slashdot Mirror
Google Sued for Allegedly Profiting From Child Porn
skinfaxi writes "Filed in New York, Jeffrey Toback claims Google has made billions by allowing child porn and 'other obscene content' providers to use sponsored links." From the article: "The suit, which claims Google acted negligently and intentionally inflicted emotional distress on the public, requests monetary damages to be determined at trial. It also accuses Google of violating federal statutes relating to child pornography and calls for the court to order that Google cease "advertising, promoting, or distributing" child pornography through its site or otherwise providing any links to such content."
Is anyone else like me and kind of hoping that google gets screwed over (at least for cash) in this case? I guess I'm torn. I don't want that precedent being set, however I feel like Google (and the other engines) brought it upon themselves with their whole China business.
Having followed the SCO case, I can hardly think that Microsoft is not behind this. How do Microsoft try to kill Google as Balmer (Microsoft President) promessed ? By trying to alter its image, creating scandals et leveraging the public opinion. This case is a great example. Just follow the money...
Not a republic, are you perhaps suggesting Bush has taken on the title of King Bush?
Technically, when the US Congress gave permission to the President to declare war without further consulting them, which is actually a power they can't give up, it installed a monarchal set of powers for the President. Not to mention that the intelligence that was given to the Congress in making this decision was 'filtered' and even 'altered', meaning the Whitehouse had access to CIA and FBI information, as well as reports from foreign agencies that the congress NEVER got to see at the time.
There are a few books on this, how it breaks the constitution, even in a '9/11' era, the president cannot make the decision in the context he did and was allowed to do.
This is just one example of a Monarchal power the president has not only taken but used illegally.
He also was installed by the Supreme Court, which is also against US 'republic' law. He wasn't elected, he managed to get the vote count suppressed before it would have shown he lost Florida, which is what the post election counts have shown repeatedly.
So king? Maybe... Lets see if he gives up his job at the end of his term or try to institute a state of emergency or martial law suspending the Presidential elections in 2008.
But this is something for the constitution attorneys to debate and bring to the public's attention, since the Media isn't focusing on the long term repercussions of the Monarchial powers Bush and his administration are using.
We could even talk about Cheney's Halliburton profits, which are ILLEGAL as well, and a form of financial profiting that is banned because of its relation to Monarchies and why our constitution and amendments prevent this.
Now to clarify some items and express my opinion on the article.
The things being alleged about Google are VERY damming, and it HAS nothing to do with the US being a republic and China being a communist state. (Which isn't technically true either.)
Child porn is illegal in the US, and easy to define. PERIOD.
Just like using 'democracy' in publications in China is illegal and apparently a law Google is MORE willing to uphold. It should also be mentioned that the freedom of speech constraints in China have less legal merit and are 'less' defined than the Child Porn laws in the US.
Filtering Child Porn in the US is something that is assumed Google would have been doing because it does break the LAW in the US.
Now add in the fact that Google was not filtering, which is one thing as there are a lot of sites that easily fool search engines. However not filtering searches is one thing, but making money from Child Porn advertisers is another thing on a grander level.
The big story is that it is being established they were making 'revenue' from Child Porn Site ads.
Advertisers for banners, etc from Google and most other onsite companies, require a process of approval to be accepted to become an advertiser. I have seen clients get 'denied' the ability to advertise on Google banner ads for some of the most stupid reasons, so now to learn that Child Porn sites were 'approved' is even more egregious.
BTW China is an economic state of capitalism but is a communism state for social policies. (The same could 'technically' be said of the US, Social Security, banning Marihuana, etc.)
So the argument that the difference in Google's policies is related to the country of business is not valid. Breaking laws is breaking laws.
Now I'm willing to let this play out and see what is found in discovery, etc. I am NOT a fan of Google's business practices, and as I have said many times, they make MS's tactics look less evil. However, the deserve the right to defend themselves on this, they would have had a 'pervert' manager approving these business activities and it is not some that was known or a company policy to allow.
Heck look at Homeland Security, two major figures were charged with child solicitation and expo