Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google May Close Gmail Germany Over Privacy Law

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the well-thats-not-very-good dept.

Matt writes "Google is threatening to shut down the German version of its Gmail service if the German Bundestag passes it's new Internet surveillance law. Peter Fleischer, Google's German privacy representative says the new law would be a severe blow against privacy and would go against Google's practice of also offering anonymous e-mail accounts. If the law is passed then starting 2008, any connection data concerning the internet, phone calls (With position data when cell phones are used), SMS etc. of any German citizen will be saved for 6 months, anonymizing services like Tor will be made illegal."

10 of 368 comments (clear)

  1. Phew! by ScrewMaster · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Just when I thought Europe was going to be the last bastion of freedom in the world.

    Congress, look out ... Germany is going to one-up you if you're not careful.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    1. Re:Phew! by Halo1 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      That's true, although it is quite "consistent" with the directive. One of our criticisms was that it is ridiculous to do what the directive requires because there are so many ways around it. Forcing ISPs to record all email from/to data can be worked around by using foreign email providers and tunnelling. Recording from/to data about IP-telephony can't be done without inspecting every single ip packet flowing through your network, and even then only if someone is using a documented protocol without encryption/obfuscation, etc.

      Banning TOR, requiring foreign email providers to play by the rules of the directive etc are minimal requirements for implementing the directive in any "sensible" way, if you look at it from an data retention efficacy perspective.

      So in the end, I am convinced it is perfectly correct to say that this is all because of that EU directive and the horrific combination of fascists and idiots that supported it "to save the children" and to "catch the terrorists".

      --
      Donate free food here
    2. Re:Phew! by octopus72 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Fortunately, it is irrelevant where Tor server actually runs :)
      It seems that idea of such directives is to prevent common case of communication from becoming really secure, so that anyone can be a suspect just if he/she ever used that method way of communication.
      For that reason we won't soon (or ever) see secure authentication and exchange of decryption keys in e.g. mobile-phones: so that police can tune in and listen whenever they want. Although we already see this "problem" with VoIP which is widely used as replacement for a fixed telephony.

    3. Re:Phew! by kocsonya · · Score: 3, Interesting

      > that supported it "to save the children" and to "catch the terrorists"

      Don't forget the most common one: "to make money". The whole push for the Great European Constitution (and the just as strong push for not asking the citizens if the actually want it or not) is all about money. They managed to fill the ??? in the Underpant Gnomes business plan:

      1) Unprecedented corporate freedom
      2) Limited and closely monitored personal freedom
      3) Profit!!!

  2. China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Yeah, Google will do in Germany what it didn't do in China? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_by_Google# China (OK, not exactly the same thing but you get the point). I won't bet on it.

  3. Brazil has had such laws for years by mangu · · Score: 5, Interesting
    According to Brazilian constitution, the right to "personal dignity" always trumps the right to privacy or freedom of expression. You cannot say anything that could be considered "offensive" about anyone, even convicted felons have their right to personal dignity.


    Brazilian ISPs have always had the duty to record and keep everything that's sent by anyone over the internet. If someone feels defamed by anything that can be proved to come from that ISP, the company is held responsible if the author cannot be found. Brazilian judges have always been very, very eager to grant injunctions against any publication of personally derogatory words or images.


    This includes books too, a famous example was a few years ago, when a biography of soccer star Garrincha was pulled out of bookstores at the request of his daughters. The reason? It was stated in the book, based on his lovers' declarations, that Garrincha's penis was approximately 27 cm (11 inches) long. This book was later released, after an appeals court decided that saying a man has a large penis is not a derogatory statement.



    1. Re:Brazil has had such laws for years by CptPicard · · Score: 3, Interesting

      These kinds of "right not to be offended" laws are among the most ludicrous pieces of legislation you can imagine, sad to hear Brazil has such an extreme case. In Finland we've got a law against "incitement against a group" which sounds harmless enough (you'd fall foul of the law if you went declaring out on the street that you believe Jews/blacks/redheads should be killed, say).

      It's just way too easy for some group to have their sensibilities oh so deeply offended when one even tries to reasonably discuss whether something about them that affects you, too, should be perhaps reconsidered. I like to participate in Finnish language-policy discussions (long story short, the 93% who are Finnish-speakers are supposedly as Swedish-speaking as the 5,5% of them, and if they aren't, they must be made so), and it's incredible how massively offended some Fenno-Swedes can be at the mere suggestion that I happen to be Finnish-speaking, and that no, I don't think it is much of a flaw in my character (or that of my possible children) that needs fixing by state intervention...

      Of course, this offends their dignity much and I've been told on numerous occasions that I'm close to inciting against a group.. :-)

      --
      I want to play Free Market with a drowning Libertarian.
  4. They have the infrastructure in place by localroger · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Germany already requires licenses for TV sets and things like baby monitors. And they enforce it. They actually have vans equipped with detection equipment that scan for electromagnetic radiation from these devices, and if you're not on record as having paid the tax their is a knock on your door. Extending this to 802.11 will be trivial.

    --
    Brackets contain world's first nanosig, highly magnified:[.]
    1. Re:They have the infrastructure in place by thebigbluecheez · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Similarly when you pick up a pre-paid SIM card for your phone, you get a form asking you to register your phone number. You have to go show ID and then the O2 (or whichever) shop keys your information in. They took my passport number, an address, punched it into the computer and said have a nice day. Had I not gone in and registered my SIM card? Phone number goes dead in two weeks, no questions asked.

      Compare this to the 'States, where getting pre-paid service is about as anonymous as a cell phone gets.

      Does anyone (any Germans in the house?) know what they DO with this? Why is it required to register my phone? Why?

      --
      I like your Macs, but I don't like your Mac users. (with apologies to Gandhi)
  5. A german's view by babooo404 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    FYI, I asked my German friend to comment on the topic and at the bottom of the article are his comments:
    http://www.centernetworks.com/first-flickr-now-goo gles-gmail-has-issues-in-germany