Slashdot Mirror
Google's Streetview Privacy Snafu Prompts Lawsuit
shmG writes "Google's secret data collection has prompted a class-action lawsuit that could force the company to pay up to $10,000 for each time it recorded data from unprotected hotspots, court documents show. The incident, which the company claims to have been unintentional, has prompted the ire of governments and privacy groups around the world. Google collected information that could be used to identify users, including 'the user's unique or chosen Wi-Fi network name, the unique number given to the user's hardware ... [and] data consisting of all or part of any documents, e-mails, video, audio, and VoIP information being sent over the network by the user,' the suit stated."
They should worry about international market.
Google is now facing criminal investigation in Germany. Collecting that kind of data is against the law there, as is
Germany's privacy laws generally restrict photographs of people and property without a person's consent, except in very public situations, such as a sporting event.
There has also been investigations in Sweden, Finland and UK about this and they will decide later if it requires criminal charges. It's good that Germany is doing that already, as it's clearly violating privacy and European laws.
Look, let me put it this way. Light is just electromagnetic radiation in a particular band of the spectrum, right? The Google vans drive down the road recording it. If you've put up some sort of barrier to prevent someone on the public street from collecting your light (like walls), the Google vans don't get it. Following so far?
Wi-Fi traffic is just electromagnetic radiation in a particular band of the spectrum, right? The Google vans drive down the road recording it. If you've put up some sort of barrier to prevent someone on the public street from collecting your Wi-Fi traffic (like WPA), the Google vans don't get it. Still following?
The owner's unique street name and number, the unique number given to the owner's car licence plate, and data consisting of all or any part of any signs, swing sets, lawn furniture arrangements, and slogans printed on t-shirts of people in the yard at the time the van drove past, is recorded.
The user's unique (???) or chosen Wi-Fi network name, the unique number given to the user's hardware ... [and] data consisting of all or part of any documents, e-mails, video, audio, and VoIP information being broadcast over the public airwaves (and available to any member of the public on the street at the time) is recorded.
Really, you don't get to be both okay with the street vans in general, but mad at this particular part of the operation. Google is being all apologetic, not because they did anything wrong, but because they know that stupid people will be mad at them if they don't. It's like being calm and careful around a rabid dog: it's not that you actually think you should have to restrict your behaviour because of rabid dogs; just that you'd rather not get bitten.
If Germany's privacy laws prevent Google from taking photos of people and property, how are their StreetView vans driving down the road taking pictures of ... people and property? I still call bullshit, and I can't imagine why Google would be allowed to collect electromagnetic radiation from a public space in one wavelength but not another.
So, if your mother decides to use a standard door lock instead of also installing a dead-bolt, she's to blame for the consequences of a break-in, rape, torture and her murder? She was asking for it, right?
Yes, people who don't use encryption are either stupid, ignorant, naive, arrogant or all of the above. This doesn't mean Google (or anyone else) should go around sniffing their traffic.
You do realise that in some countries folks don't lock their homes? Not because they're stupid, but because they live in safe law-abiding communities. What Google did (or any other criminal assfuck) is akin to an outsider walking into this community and trying doors until an unlocked one is found.
It's criminal behaviour no matter how you sugar coat it or how ignorant/stupid the public was. Google should be prosecuted to the fullest extent allowed by law in every single country they engaged in this criminal behaviour. We'd expect our law enforcement servants to do this to any other criminal, so why not Google?
Google shouldn't necessarily be singled out for mapping wifi networks. There are tons of other companies doing it. Whether it is right or not, is something that should be decided categorically, not as part of a 'google is evil' campaign.
There are plenty of real reasons to be upset at Google besides whether they saved some packets of unencrypted data that were being broadcast by a radio for anyone to see. Let's focus on those than try and drum up some fake outrage over this minor shit.
http://blog.slaingod.com
Those do not fit into your analogy:
There is a difference between walking around naked in your house and doing so in your glass house.
There is a difference between selling your 2 tickets to a concert you won't attend and selling your 100 tickets to the same concert.
It doesn’t matter if you can see into my house. The difference is between if you look into it unintentionally (e.g. by accident), or intentionally (peeping tom). It’s the intention that counts.
I can’t punish you for walking around the corner and the house coming into your field of view. That would be very unfair.
But I can punish you for standing outside my house in your car all day long, looking inside, and doing something under a blanket, that is obviously “jacking off”. You get the drift.
About selling 100 tickets to that concert: There is nothing wrong with that, and there never was. It’s just that the organizing companies think it is normal to have a monopoly on it, when actually they are committing a crime with enforcing such a monopoly: Anticompetitive behavior. The same thing Microsoft and Intel got punished for.
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.