Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Relents, Will Hand Over European Wi-Fi Data

Posted by timothy on from the at-least-we-know-the-govts-won't-abuse-it dept.

itwbennett writes "Having previously denied demands from Germany that the company turn over hard drives with data it secretly collected from open wireless networks over the past three years, Google has reversed course. A Google representative said that it will hand over the data to German, French, and Spanish authorities within a matter of days, according to the Financial Times, which first reported this latest development on Wednesday. 'We screwed up. Let's be very clear about that,' Google CEO Eric Schmidt told the newspaper."

9 of 214 comments (clear)

  1. Great by lennier1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They're opening up a whole warehouse full of cans of worms by handing the data over to a government with plenty of agendas instead of destroying it.

    1. Re:Great by Third+Position · · Score: 4, Insightful

      True. But they opened the first can of worms by collecting it in the first place.

      --
      American Third Position
      Finally, a real choice!
    2. Re:Great by micksam7 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      They opened the can of worms by announcing that they had collected it. If they stayed silent, and shredded the data quietly, they'd probably wouldn't be in this mess and no one would have known they ever did it. Google instead has been trying to make this situation 'right' by being transparent about it, and no one gives a crap about it. The governments certainly are going to grab that data, use it as evidence to prosecute Google, and keep it around for ~other reasons~ for years upon years.

    3. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      They opened the can of worms by announcing that they had collected it. If they stayed silent, and shredded the data quietly, they'd probably wouldn't be in this mess and no one would have known they ever did it. Google instead has been trying to make this situation 'right' by being transparent about it, and no one gives a crap about it. The governments certainly are going to grab that data, use it as evidence to prosecute Google, and keep it around for ~other reasons~ for years upon years.

      eh.. you do know that they only announced this after governments in Europe requested to audit their data collection in general? The ball was already rolling on this, and they were smart in rolling with it. But this was not something Google just announced out of the blue on their own without outside pressure.

      And Google has a patent pending on the method they used to collect this data.. Accident my ass.

    4. Re:Great by thegarbz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Only for those of you who apply all your thoughts on privacy entirely inconsistently.

      Few months ago on slashdot someone published a list of every wifi hotspot on their train line. Where was the uproar then? Cops want to reserve the right no to be photographed in public, and people complain (rightfully so) that what they do in public should be recordable with no recourse. Now google drives a car down the streets and collects your publicly visible information (SSID) and you complain again that they should not be collecting private data?

      How come every ideal on slashdot is applied so haphazardly? Make a choice people. Should something that anyone can see from your street be private, or public?

      As a side note, how many people complaining about Google's collection of wireless information actually bothered to uncheck that little box that says "Broadcast SSID"?

  2. Re:Meta Screwup? by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The big screwup is getting caught at collecting it.

    --
    If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
  3. Re:Whatever for? by yyxx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Funny, by the way, how Google wondered about the legality of having its data inspected by the data protection authority.

    Nothing "funny" about it; they probably have good lawyers, lawyers who advised them that handing over the data to the "data protection authority" without a court order may itself constitute a violation of German privacy laws.

    Usually that would mean sending someone to have a look and see and perhaps sample the data.

    Or it might mean that the "data protection authority" goes on a massive data mining quest to identify file sharers, pornographers, and anybody who runs an open WLAN, and then charges all of those people with breaking the law. They couldn't drive around collecting that data themselves, but they can obtain it from Google. Probably it doesn't mean that in this specific case, but it sets a bad precedent.

    Think about it: if you were a government intent on violating people's privacy, what would be the best place to do it? That's right: the "data protection authority", armed with a legal right to request and inspect anybody's data without a court order, just to look for more "data protection violations".

  4. Re:Not good by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ``I trust Google more than German officials''

    I wouldn't. Both Google and German government are made up of people. There will be good people and bad people in both organizations.

    The major differences are that the the German government has a rather limited sphere of influence and you have some control over it through elections and other measures, like demonstrations, campaigns, founding your own party, etc. You vote along with a lot of citizens who are in the same boat as you are.

    On the other hand, Google operates world-wide, and I doubt that you have a lot of control over their actions unless you work for them. Sure, you can buy shares and have a vote, but it will be your vote among that of a lot of people who don't know and/or don't care what happens in Germany.

    Speaking for myself, I would rather keep my data away from both the government and large multinational companies. I am certainly no more comfortable with Google having it than with my (Dutch) government having it. And, as this case demonstrates, it doesn't necessarily matter who collects the data - you may be more comfortable with Google collecting it than with your government collecting it, but it looks like now both Google and the government are going to have it.

    --
    Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
  5. Getting worse by space_hippy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Still not as bad as the state of New Mexico, where you can be convicted and go to jail for driving "impaired" based solely on the officers "expert" opinion.
    No breathalyzer.
    No blood test.
    You don't even have to fail the field sobriety test. All up to the police officers expert opinion. Some judges are convicting these cases when they should be tossed out.

    The burden of proof is shifting to the defendant, not good in my opinion.