Slashdot Mirror


Why Google Is Disabling Kids' Gmail Accounts

theodp writes "The Washington Post's Elizabeth Flock managed to hold Google's feet to the fire and get an explanation of sorts for why it's making kids cry by disabling their Gmail accounts after years of use. Giving 12-year-olds access to Gmail — unless they are using Google Apps for Education accounts through their school — is proving to be as formidable a task for Google as making renewable energy cheaper than coal. But what about that viral 'Dear Sophie' commercial, asked Flock, in which a father creates a Gmail account for his baby daughter and uses it to send her photos, videos, and messages that chronicle her growing up? 'The implied understanding,' replied a Google spokesman, 'is that the girl in the story does not have access to the account, but that she will have access to it "someday."'"

37 of 228 comments (clear)

  1. Who's fault is it? by sidthegeek · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Is it Google's fault? Or COPPA's? Or both?

    1. Re:Who's fault is it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Children shouldn't be on the internet anyway. They should be readin the bible.

    2. Re:Who's fault is it? by Anthony+Mouse · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I was wondering, do you think it would be more efficient if you could come in and tell us when something is not Google's fault? I'm just saying, it would probably save you some time, since the list of things that you think are their fault is clearly much longer.

    3. Re:Who's fault is it? by martin-boundary · · Score: 4, Funny

      No need. There's an app for that.

    4. Re:Who's fault is it? by AngryDeuce · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Seems to me that Google should startup a 'Google Kids' to handle things like this in compliance with COPPA. Once the child reaches 12, they can convert it over to a regular Gmail account.

      Parents can administrate, while at the same time teaching their kids how to behave on the internet, teachers can email assignments, etc. As long as control rests solely with the parent, I see no issue with something like that.

    5. Re:Who's fault is it? by Runaway1956 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually - COPPA needs to die. Parents are supposed to be a child's first line of defense. Then the courts. Simply mandating that kids can't access and/or must be monitored by a provider such as Google is simply asinine. As a parent, and as a grandparent, I'd cheefully counsel my kids how to circumvent COPPA bullshit.

      "See the box, where they ask how old you are? What's the minimum age? Alright, Honey, just add 3 or 6 to that minimum age, so your "birth year" is going to be 19xx, alright? Yeah, I know you're not 20 yet, but THEY don't know that!"

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    6. Re:Who's fault is it? by Trepidity · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, I would be more ok with Google just saying "this isn't a service for children" if they didn't also make TV ads about children having Google accounts. Pick one or the other!

    7. Re:Who's fault is it? by Galestar · · Score: 5, Informative
      You obviously completely misunderstand the issues at stake here.
      Please read the following;
      Children's Online Privacy Protection Act

      "fuck you kid, come back when you're 18."

      The age is 13, not 18, and because of your ignorance,

      "fuck you Moryath, come back when you know what you're talking about"

      --
      AccountKiller
    8. Re:Who's fault is it? by Defenestrar · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think teaching how to circumvent COPPA is dangerous without teaching when to do so. There are a lot of age verification things out there on the internet and they're not all for the same reason. COPPA is for preventing a child from disclosing too much personal information for use by another party without informed consent of the parent (i.e. marketing and solicitation). I think teaching a child not to give out their real birth date online is a very valuable lesson. (Birth date and state are enough info for an accurate guess at a social security number, and the region can probably be obtained with a reasonable chance of success for a child (lower chance to have moved from the area of birth)). Other age verifiers are for content, some websites self regulate, others follow third party guidelines (e.g. ESRB). I expect to be the final word in what content my children permissibly access on the internet, but I do appreciate the age checkers as a sign for younger children to stop and ask permission. Older children are going to do their own thing according to what you've taught them up to that point.

      Also, I've always been surprised that the age submission check is considered a valid method for absolving an entity of COPPA's requirements considering the lengths they have to go through if they do know they are dealing with a child. It seems rather trivial in comparison to these requirements:

      Website operators must use reasonable procedures to ensure they are dealing with the child's parent. These procedures may include:

      obtaining a signed form from the parent via postal mail or facsimile;

      accepting and verifying a credit card number;

      taking calls from parents on a toll-free telephone number staffed by trained personnel;

      email accompanied by digital signature;

      email accompanied by a PIN or password obtained through one of the verification methods above.

      Operators who follow one of these procedures acting in good faith to a request for parental access are protected from liability under federal and state law for inadvertent disclosures of a child's information to someone who purports to be a parent.

    9. Re:Who's fault is it? by Vaphell · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You have it backwards. Having ridiculous laws is much worse than not having laws at all. Ridiculous laws will be broken and this is what undermines the very respect for the law.
      Also protecting the precious snowflakes at all costs has dire consequences when they meet the harsh bitch called life completely unprepared.

    10. Re:Who's fault is it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      How does that get app store approval? It sounds like it would violate the commandment to worship no other gods beside Jobs.

    11. Re:Who's fault is it? by Joe+U · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Windows Live/Hotmail allows and encourages child accounts.

      That leads me to a few ideas as to why Google won't comply with COPPA. The most likely one being that they just can't turn the marketing machine off.

    12. Re:Who's fault is it? by Joe+U · · Score: 5, Funny

      You are seeing that with the OWS people. If you look at the demographics, there are a LOT of people born after 1985 or so. They lived their entire lives without ever seeing a recession. They think the enormous growth of the 90's was normal. Now comes a recession that affects their precious little selves and they freak the fuck out.

      If I can speak for my Generation (GenX), for a moment: (abridged version) Fuck you, Boomers and fuck you Millenials.

      The Baby Boomers for really screwing us over, several times. I look forward to the retirement homes we're going to toss you into on the budget you gave us. The Millenials for being whining idiots that generally fuck up the Internet I helped create. Please build better retirement homes in about 30 years, thanks.

    13. Re:Who's fault is it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How is it even a "fault"? Google provides email service FOR FREE. They can do whatever the hell they want with it at any time with or without notification.

      If people don't like it, they can go pay for email somewhere else. The sense of entitlement going on here is ridiculous.

    14. Re:Who's fault is it? by howardd21 · · Score: 3, Funny

      As an atheist, I wholeheartedly support this idea. If all kids were forced to read the entire Bible before they turn 13, and pass the exam on textual knowledge - why, that would probably do more to reduce the influence of Christianity than efforts of all the various skeptic and secular humanist groups in the country. ~

      As a christian, I would take that deal everyday. When the bible is just read, and understood in it's context to say what it says, it makes more sense than science falsely called, and much more sense than the philosophers of this world.

      --
      no comment
    15. Re:Who's fault is it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      The iBle.

    16. Re:Who's fault is it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I was watching Venture Bros with a friend, who is a lukewarm Christian , the other day. He was talking about Brock Samson. It went like this.

      I said "Samson, like from the Bible".
      He said "What?".
      I said "Magic Hair, Jawbone of an ass, Paid his gambling debts with foreskins?"
      He said "WHAT? That's not in the bible, you're making that shit up, right?".

      Bible stories FTW.

  2. So COPPA is teaching our children to lie... by JoeMerchant · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Like every 9 year old on MySpace ever did... just put in the wrong birthyear and everything stays cool.

    1. Re:So COPPA is teaching our children to lie... by NotQuiteInsane · · Score: 4, Informative

      Or go over to yahoo, which is all spammers anyway.

      FTFY.

    2. Re:So COPPA is teaching our children to lie... by Richard_at_work · · Score: 5, Informative

      Also, the use of the viral video is a little off, since the baby never actually does anything with the account (as the Google spokesman says) - the father signs up for the account and agrees to the terms, the father then composes messages and sends them, the father reads messages received etc etc. Its the father doing things in the babies name, which is a whole different ball game to the kid signing up and using it themselves.

    3. Re:So COPPA is teaching our children to lie... by martin-boundary · · Score: 3, Funny

      It's not lying when you type in your age in dog years. You..... speciesist!

    4. Re:So COPPA is teaching our children to lie... by antifoidulus · · Score: 4, Funny

      I dunno, she probably sat there and pooped while he applied for the account, which is maybe her way of expressing her opinion towards the EULA.

  3. Might as Well Teach them Young To Lie... by Ron+Bennett · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seems a good lesson that often in life one must tell lies of varying degrees. Fibbing about age is one of those.

    Many websites and services (email, web hosting / blog sites, facebook, etc) have age stipulations ranging from 13 to 21, which effectively makes much of the web useless to young people unless they lie.

    1. Re:Might as Well Teach them Young To Lie... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Just wait until they sue the kids for violating the law meant to protect them, under the exact same law.

      And then have 'em tried as adults, just for good measure.

      Don't forget to tell your 13-year old kids it's illegal to make n00d self-shots in the mirror with their iPhones. They will be in possession of extremely illegal content one minute after their 14th birthday, be tried as adults and registered as sex offenders for life.

      Remember: all the things we used to do when we were young are now illegal. All.

  4. My daughter was extremely upset as well. by stasike · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One day my pre-teen-aged daughter wanted to set up an avatar for her Google mail account, like her best friend had. A nice pony or whatever. So we have opened the settings and one of things that Google wanted to know was the date of birth. After naively filling in the date (*not* the real number, but still way low age) ... poooof ... the account was gone. And mind you, this was account my daughter has created in an "IT" class. In my country we do not have educational accounts the article talks about.

    In one second the account is there, the next ... gone.
    Google wanted scan of my ID or something.
    YOU ARE NOT GONNA GET IT GOOGLE!!! You Do. Not. Need. A. Copy. Of. My. Passport.

    So we have created another account with a slightly different name, but my daughter has been upset for quite a long time. Still is, in fact. And I had to explain why Google are such ... bloody morons.

    The same day I have made backup of my entire Google mail account. I do not trust them anymore that they won't pull the same stunt with MY personal account.

    1. Re:My daughter was extremely upset as well. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You Do. Not. Need. A. Copy. Of. My. Passport.

      Actually.. legally.. they do. If you want access to that account again, you can either verify that her parent has authorized the kid to be scaped and indexed and acknowledge that your kid can receive the accompanying advertising, or you can create another anonymous account to have similar advertising, scraping, analyzing done to her anyway. In one case, she gets her account back; in the other case, Google gets their data anyway.

      As much as I'm for privacy, it's not like providing a copy of your passport is providing anything that Google doesn't have on you anyway. They don't even need _your_ google account to link it to, do they (not sure)? They just, legally, need to be sure that a parent/guardian has allowed Google to analyze their kid. US laws, if not your country's laws.

      So perhaps you should explain to your daughter one of two things:
      1. Your resentment of someone verifying that you are you, and you have control over your kid
      2. US laws designed to protect the privacy of kids, and how they're hurting her. Perhaps you can go into how your own country's privacy laws work.

    2. Re:My daughter was extremely upset as well. by Galestar · · Score: 3, Informative

      Why do you blame Google? They are only following these stupid laws about children under 13. They didn't write the laws, blame the people who did.

      --
      AccountKiller
    3. Re:My daughter was extremely upset as well. by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 3, Funny

      Why do you want them to delete your gmail account?

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    4. Re:My daughter was extremely upset as well. by acoster · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, they don't think they have jurisdiction over foreign individuals. But they do have jurisdiction over the company holding the data - and quite possibly over the physical server itself (if it is in an american data centre).

      --
      "Go forth, and be excellent to each other" --Bill & Ted
    5. Re:My daughter was extremely upset as well. by MrMista_B · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Free does not mean 'immune from criticism'.

      Why do you imply that it does?

  5. Don't Link Your GMail to Google+ Account by Ron+Bennett · · Score: 5, Informative

    In reply to some comments / sentiments in this thread regarding how quick Google is to delete accounts, be wary of creating a Google+ account / user profile.

    There have been many reports of Google+ accounts being flagged for various reasons (username choosen, duplicate acct, complaints from others, etc) resulting in the linked services, such as, GMail being suspended / terminated too.

    Imho, avoid creating a Google+ account - not so easy now that Google is rolling that out across services, so the next best option is not create a profile; leave it as empty as possible. And keep services separate ... don't use the same Google+ account for GMail as one does for other services (ie. YouTube).

  6. Son's Account Was Reinstated With My Supervision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Hi All,

    I too was put off by Google's disabling of my son's account, but I decided to give Google a chance and see if they would be reasonable. I sent a note to them in the only way I could come up with, by writing it (by hand on a paper), scanning together, my ID, and my note which was an explanation that my son was really under age, and that as his parent, I was the "holder" of his account, but he was using it under my supervision. I sent the note to their photo ID link, and his account was reinstated. I assume that they actually read the note, and allowed this, but it is possible they have an automated process that accepts any photo you send as ID, and automatically reinstates the account. If they do, shame on them. If they don't, I applaud them for being reasonable.

    Rob

  7. Re:You get what you pay for by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Free" doesn't mean "exempt from criticism." That said, they're also free to not listen to you.

    And I think this is really the fault of idiotic "think of the children" laws.

    --
    Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
  8. Get rid of that stupidity by loufoque · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When I was ten (1997), I had an account on virtually all website/email services that were big (relatively) at the time. There was never question of deleting my account because I was a kid.

    Stripping kids of the right to use that kind of service is the same as stripping kids from having the right to use the Internet. This is preposterous and stupid.
    American people, get rid of that law.

  9. It's even worse for Google+ by KeithH · · Score: 3, Informative

    Facebook is full of underage users and lets them "go legit" when they turn 13. As a consequence, they've captured this audience and all of the adults that they'll grow into (as well as a goodly number of their parents). Google+ requires that users be eighteen. That's ridiculous. Ostensibly, it is temporary but I've seen no suggestion from Google that this is any sort of priority. This is why Google+ will never challenge Facebook. When Amazon and Facebook merge, they'll rule the world. How very unfortunate.

  10. Read before slagging. Compliance rules are short. by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 3, Informative

    I don't think you 'get' COPPA. It doesn't say an internet service needs to monitor your children. It is saying in essence the exact opposite. It says that they have to disclose what data they collect, who they share it with, limit the data collected to only what is necessary to use the service, can't collect any information about the child unless the parent gives explicit permission. If the parent gives permission to collect the data, it allows the parents to tell the service to stop and to delete the child's data. It also lists other rules on what data can be collected and how it is shared... but read it yourself I'm not going to list it all here. The only thing that pisses me off is that I can't stipulate the same conditions to Google for myself.

    COPPA is a tool to aid the parent and COPPA is anathema to everything Google is about: collecting data. Data is the life blood of the company; literally. It is easier for them to just say no to those under 13 than to spend a ton of money to set up the required controls. Especially, as I think, most parents are likely to chose not to allow their child's data to be collected nor shared (and I can't blame them one bit). And it is the data that is important to Google, not the child. It is with the data that they generate their revenue. So in a nutshell, they have two choices: 1) spend a ton of money to create and maintain the controls to meet the COPPA requirements and keep children using GMail and other services (which also eat up bandwidth and disk space, both of which also cost money) without gaining any revenue generating data from them in return, or 2) simply bar children from using Google services. Option 2 is way cheaper. Remember in a business the number one rule is that money coming in MUST be greater than money going out. Google is just following their number one rule. You libertarians and neocons can't possibly argue Google's position in this respect, can you? Hell, even business friendly liberals.. yes they exist... can't argue either.

    Financially the choice they made makes much more sense for their business (and they are a business, not your cuddly free email provider). Remember, the only reason Google cares at all about the child or anyone else who puts their personal data on a Google server is because they put their personal data on a Google server.

    You can try and say it is up to the parent to monitor the child which is a good starting point, but what are you going to do when the biggest services tell you they are going to store and possibly share (at their discretion not yours) your child's data and there is nothing you can do about it? Tell your child not to use the internet? Good luck with that. Seriously... good luck. The rest of us understand that you can say no, but if they can get access to the internet, anywhere, they are going to start using it. The library, a friends house, wherever. Especially if all their friends are using it, and then it will happen no matter what you say or do (unless you are one of those who chose to live in the backwoods of Idaho because 'the government is out to get you'... but if that's the case, you have more serious problems, and it ain't the government). So you might as well have them use it at home. And it would be nice to know who knows their name and where they live, and better yet, tell them to mind their own business.

    As to how to verify the parent:

    Access Verification
    At a parent's request, operators must disclose the general kinds of personal information they collect online from children (for example, name, address, telephone number, email address, hobbies), as well as the specific information collected from children who visit their sites. Operators must use reasonable procedures to ensure they are dealing with the child's parent before they provide access to the child's specific information.

    They can use a variety of methods to

    --
    -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
  11. Re:You say that in jest, right? by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 3, Informative
    And you have established this fact- as opposed to decided it sounded good to you one day, or heard it from somewhere - how exactly?

    The bible and it's ilk the Koran and all the rest are some of the worst set of "moral teachings" mankind has ever inflicted on itself.

    You have only to do two cents worth of internet search or read God is Not Great by Hitchens or Why I am Not A Christian by Russel or anything by Dawkins and especially Sam Harris's The End of Faith http://www.samharris.org/ to explode the idea that religion is moral, or was moral at one time in the past

    This is not something where you one say "well, you say this and I say that so both our arguments are equally valid.. because it's about morals" because religionists exactly DON'T believe that morals are relative and neither do scientists..

    People behave in the ways they do because of genetics and environmental pressures. A part of that behaviour is the apprehension of and feelings about morality. Absent a compelling environmental contingency compelling a person to violent action, and that includes jealousy,. only sociopaths have to be told that killing is wrong. The rest of us *feel* it to be a horror and just plain wrong.

    Ditto the uneasy feelings we get when we defy the norms of our society Sure, we can over come them for a reason, but that reason is also typically value - like The Truth- we learned from our society.

    No one needs the Bible or any other holy book to help them to feel moral. It's a part f our genetic inheritance.

    Ditto a moral society. Science is what produces a moral society because science brings us to truth and reality and when that meets our genetically mediated desire to "not do evil" and to empathize with our fellow human, we then can effectively meet those goals.

    It;s no coincidence that religion is the number one source of wars throughout history, always in the name of doing good. That's because it's false knowledge, bad knowledge , with a Bronze Age understanding of How People Work and How The World Works and when THAT is what is guiding your inborn desire to achieve good and peace in the world, THIS is the result: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LACyLTsH4ac