Google Caught Misbehaving By Kenyan Startup

An anonymous reader sends in an interesting story from Mocality, a company that painstakingly built a business directory in Kenya. When they discovered that somebody was systematically harvesting the contact information they'd collected (and after a few very odd phone calls from confused Kenyan business owners), they set up a sting to see what was really going on. They swapped out the phone numbers listed for a few businesses with phone numbers in their own call centers, and then waited to see who called. Mocality was shocked to discover it was Google Kenya, who falsely claimed a business collaboration with Mocality, and then lied about Mocality's business practices.

Comments

Do no evil indeed

[elrous0]

FTFA:

On this call (first 2 minutes) you can clearly hear Douglas identify himself as Google Kenya employee, state, and then reaffirm, that GKBO is working in collaboration with Mocality, and that we are helping them with GKBO, before trying to offer the business owner a website (and upsell them a domain name). Over the 11 minutes of the whole call he repeatedly states that Mocality is with, or under (!) Google.

If the allegations in this article are true, this is where they really cross the line. Harvesting a publicly available database and then contacting those businesses to sell them something is fine (though a little sleazy for a mainstream business like Google). But then trying to claim that you're working with that company when you're not is just plain fraud. It would be like some random insurance company calling people up and saying "Hi, we're working with your mortgage holder, Bank of Topeka, and would like to offer you a special insurance deal...in conjunction with Bank of Topeka."

In fact, Mocality found out about this whole scam when customers started calling them up and asking for support for their new websites (thinking Mocality were the ones who had sold them the sites). I guess it never occurred to Google that this would happen and that Mocality would want to know why.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[nahdude812]

Note the key words, "Google Kenya" - this is a branch office where some employee is taking a shortcut. This is hardly a condemnation of Google as a company unless and until it's demonstrated that this is either more than an isolated incident or was based on instructions received from corporate overlords.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[antitithenai]

Actually no, Google's Indian call centers are involved too, so this is obviously coming outside Google's Kenya's offices. On top of that, Google as the company is fully responsible for all their offices practices. You can't just point out that some other department did it.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Missing.Matter]

Note the key word "Google." When it's your name being used, you have to take the bad as well as the good. It's not "Everything good is done by Google, everything bad is done by lone employees who do not really represent Google."

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Tufriast]

The corporate offices in Google CA were traced to this issue; check his IP logs he has. I might be foggy on this, but from what I saw, this came from California as well.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Colonel Korn]

Note the key words, "Google Kenya" - this is a branch office where some employee is taking a shortcut. This is hardly a condemnation of Google as a company unless and until it's demonstrated that this is either more than an isolated incident or was based on instructions received from corporate overlords.

As other responses pointed out, this went beyond Google Kenya, so your point is invalid. Moreover, even if it were simply Google Kenya, I find your attitude to be terribly naive. If we don't hold parent companies/politicians/military leaders/whatever responsible for the actions of their subordinates and default to the notion that every negative act is that of a rogue, corrupt underling, we nearly eliminate the concept of institutional responsibility. The burden of proof in this sort of situation should be on the institution - there's no reason to assume that an incident was out of line with company policy until proven otherwise.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Synkronos]

OrgName: Google Inc.
OrgId: GOGL
Address: 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway
City: Mountain View
StateProv: CA

That just indicates that the network is registered under Google CA, not that any authorisation for the activity going over that network is. The only thing we can really infer is that the operation is larger than _just_ the Kenyan office, but whether that's some Kenyan dude calling his buddy in India to do him a favour, or the CEO of Google personally masterminding an eeeeeevil takeover of everything, is anybody's guess. Probably somewhere in between.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[antitithenai]

Oh please, you really want to defend Google's fraud on small companies? Google as a whole is responsible for what the company does. This was outright fraud by Google and they need to be called upon it and not defend that it was just Google Kenya + Google India doing it.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[JustinOpinion]

You're absolutely right. If the allegations are true, then Google is at fault and should be taken to task for this.

However, when things like this happen, it's usually worthwhile to figure out whether the bad behavior was isolated to a single person, a single department, a single branch, or whether it's a common part of the company's internal culture, or even a company-wide policy. The point being that if we can reliably determine that it was a small subset of the company behaving badly, and the company removes the offending parties, then you can reasonably keep interacting with the company (albeit with more vigilance than you were before). If, on the other hand, it's clear that this was part of a company-wide pattern, then you should reasonably stop trusting the company as a whole.

To be clear: it's not a matter of absolving the parent company from responsibility (they are indeed responsible for everything their subsidiaries and employees do). It's about coming up with valid predictions about how likely this company is to be a repeat offender.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Dunbal]

Note the key words, "Google Kenya" - this is a branch office where some employee is taking a shortcut.

Doesn't matter. If some McDonalds somewhere in the world is serving people maggoty burgers, the parent company is going to want to know who and shut them down right away. There are certain responsibilities you get when you let other people use your name, specifically it's still up to you to protect your reputation by not making franchise agreements with arse-holes.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[El Torico]

A subordinate's excuse is, "I was just following orders."
A superior's excuse excuse is, "I was out of the loop."
Neither is acceptable.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Synkronos]

I'm not defending anything. I merely stated that the mention of Mountain View CA in the whois information is not proof of anything other than the registration being in Google CA's name, rather than what the earlier posted thought it implied.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[1s44c]

Note the key words, "Google Kenya" - this is a branch office where some employee is taking a shortcut. This is hardly a condemnation of Google as a company unless and until it's demonstrated that this is either more than an isolated incident or was based on instructions received from corporate overlords.

But was it really Google or was it someone else pretending to be Google?

I suspect this was just a scammer abusing google's good name to sell domain names or whatever.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Synkronos]

The Indian traffic comes over a Google-owned network. It's very unlikely that that was spoofed or set up, scammers don't generally go to that much trouble. It's far more likely that these are in fact Google originated actions.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[alexosaki]

I don't think that's something we should really let them get away with -- Union Carbide did that, too, arguing that they didn't have any responsibility for what happened in Bhopal because it was some subsidiary of theirs.

Set aside questions of branding and PR, and set aside whether or not some mysterious, shadowy figure in Mountainview signed the order to go ahead. That it happened at all either suggests that Google's corporate culture is so venal and corrupt that Google-Kenya thought that it was acceptable, or that Google is so incompetent and muddled that they're not capable of articulating their legitimate culture to their own employees and contractors.

With the Google Chrome advertising dustup a couple weeks back, it could be either, but neither is particularly good and neither should free them of "condemnation of Google as a company."

Re:Do no evil indeed

[antitithenai]

This has been pointed out several times in the discussion. Read the article, there's other branches of Google involved too, like Google's Indian call centers. There is also lots of proof and ip addresses that lead back to Google HQ.

There were no further accesses from the IP address 41.203.221.138 after 4pm 23rd December. Co-incidence? or had someone realised we were onto them?

However, there were some NEW strange messages from business owners- theyÃ(TM)d apparently been contacted by a call centre in India with the same promise of a website.

NetRange: 74.125.0.0 - 74.125.255.255
CIDR: 74.125.0.0/16
OriginAS:
NetName: GOOGLE

Re:Do no evil indeed

[tripleevenfall]

I wonder if the same excuse-making would apply if this had been Bing/Microsoft?

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Archimagus]

I don't think anyone is saying that Google shouldn't be held responsible. Just that it's probably not Google trying to be evil, but some random employee breaking the law. If corporate deals with it accordingly I don't see how you can condemn the company as a whole for it. If the dude making your burger at the local burger hut spits on your burger does that make the whole burger hut corporation an evil business for having their employees spit in burgers? No, it makes the guy a jerk who doesn't follow corporate policy.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

Google is responsible for fixing the problem...that said the bad practices of a few do not indict an entire organization, unless of course directives were coming down from leadership that this is acceptable practices or Google proper doesn't respond adequately once the activities are exposed.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[nahdude812]

I agree that Google as a whole is responsible for the actions of its individual branches, but it's how Google responds to the accusation that determines whether Google condones the behavior, not whether Google was able to proactively micromanage branch offices.

I don't buy your theory that because an Indian call center was involved, this automatically makes it an action blessed by corporate. Branch offices have their own budgets and discretionary spending. Maybe it was Eric Schmidt himself who told them to do this. But we really have no way of knowing, and it's a simpler explanation that one or a few employees were engaged in taking shortcuts than that Google corporate issues orders to branch offices which involve instructions to illegally misrepresent a business relationship.

Or maybe it was the Indian call center themselves who took this "initiative" and decided to lie about the relationship (that would certainly be consistent with when we fired a call center for overtly lying to our customers to shorten call times).

I'll side with Occam's Razor on this. If corporate wanted this information this badly, they'd have paid for it. The bad press and legal repercussions would outweigh the licensing costs.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[antitithenai]

Have you even read the article? It was a huge operation and on some days they manually scraped and called over 2500 businesses. No single employee can do that. And there was also other Google branches involved, like Google India.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

This would be a 1000 post thread by now. All ranting and raving mostly.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[tripleevenfall]

I'll side with Occam's Razor on this. If corporate wanted this information this badly, they'd have paid for it.

Since when is that a corporation's preferred course of action...?

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

While I admit the circumstantial evidence is quite damning, I'll await some word from Google on this issue. The fact is, the evidence is circumstantial. There's no actual evidence of Google India being involved, only that the site was accessed by an IP registered to Google and then a phone call came in from India. The whole story is pretty circumspect though, and it really sounds like a social engineering call. I mean, since when does Google even sell domain names or websites? It's just not a business they're in, it doesn't make any sense for them to be cold calling small business in Africa trying to hard sell domain names.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[mcmonkey]

I have mod points, but can't find the 'pollyanna' option.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[stanlyb]

Translated, if something good comes from Google, first we have to understand if it is isolated to a single person, department, by accident, just bad mood, lacking internal culture, and when and only when all other reasons are excluded, we could say: THIS GOOD STUFF COMES FROM GOOGLE. With a little hint of doubt of course.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[antitithenai]

Branch offices have their own budgets and discretionary spending. Maybe it was Eric Schmidt himself who told them to do this. But we really have no way of knowing, and it's a simpler explanation that one or a few employees were engaged in taking shortcuts than that Google corporate issues orders to branch offices which involve instructions to illegally misrepresent a business relationship.

So Google can do whatever they wish and it's not evil as long as it's not directly coming from Eric Schmidt? In many countries it's also common practice to bribe officials and government for better business deals and to get away from trouble. Would it be ok for Google branch to do that? Would it be evil? What about if the common practice in the country was to have slaves and those not wanting to work were shot. Since it's common practice, that doesn't make it evil for Google?

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

From the article, they never attempted to contact Google or inform them of what was going on. It seems like their first instinct was to use this for a little PR, rather than resolve the problem. Personally, I'd much rather know exactly what happened than see one side waving around a story to get noticed.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[stanlyb]

I agree. Google NEVER tries to be evil. They are just ......

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft has a history of pulling dick moves, that the corporate office is fully aware of, and continuing even with large public outcry. Google has a few offices/individuals that they don't have good control of. Even though these acts are deplorable and illegal, it is nowhere near Microsoft's history of deplorable legal acts.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[a2wflc]

My fortune 100 company has branches, subsidiaries, and employees all over the world. We have fired VPs of a region for things like this going on in their geographic area. There are many things we don't allow anywhere globally even though they are legal or the only way to get things done in some countries.

I can't stand all of the business practice, ethics, and legal training I have to go through every year (along with 10s of thousands of other employees) at a pretty high cost to the company. But everyone from the top down to new hires knows that stuff like this won't be tolerated and that responsibility doesn't stop with the person doing the unethical behavior (so the VPs insist on everyone under them being aware of corporate policy and follow it, and you do need the push from that level).

So I know it's possible to control and have have no problem blaming "Google" as well as "Google Kenya". I don't know all the facts here, so google may very well have similar policies to my company and someone high up will be fired. But, if they haven't been making an effort to stop things like this from the corporate level, I will put some blame on them.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[antitithenai]

Google does sell domains and hosting. http://www.google.com/apps/intl/en/business/domain.html

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

Note the key words, "Google Kenya" - this is a branch office where some employee is taking a shortcut. This is hardly a condemnation of Google as a company unless and until it's demonstrated that this is either more than an isolated incident or was based on instructions received from corporate overlords.

You must be new here. If it's a sufficiently big company, Slashdot, as a whole, is constantly chomping at the bit to find something, anything to condemn it to hell, moreso if they can get off on the smug satisfaction of pointing at their company slogan and shouting "AHA! SEE??? SEEEEE???!??!? HA! HA HA! LOOK! LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOK!!!!" to anyone who they're convinced can be coerced into giving a shit.

It also very specifically has to be a sufficiently big company. The question isn't if we'd be defending them if Microsoft/Bing or some other large company with a vastly overwhelming history of directly breaking laws and/or acting dishonestly did this, it's a question of whether or not we would be defending them if a small startup did the exact same thing. A while ago, Google went over the exact threshold where the generic Slashdot reader (i.e. most of them) suddenly starts assuming everything the company does is evil, sight unseen, and are desperate for reasons to prove this.

Now, all of this has been a part of Slashdot culture since day one. So yes, you must be new here. No, that user number isn't fooling anyone; you clearly stole your account from someone who should know better.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Canazza]

Compare and Contrast with News Corp's News of the World Phone Tapping/Hacking/Listening to Voicemail scandal which went all the way up to Murdochs Dragon-in-chief.
That was something that was endemic and part of the corporate culture and was rightfully put down in the face of it. An enquiry is underway to see if it permeated any of the other newspapers under the control of News Corp.

If said Phone Hacking was actually only an isolated incident, or restricted to one or two reporters, they would rightly be fired and the company investigated (indeed, that's what was done, and it revealed more shenanigans). The same is true in the case of Google Kenya.

If it's restricted to one or two people, or (as a multinational) restricted to one country, then Googles reputation as a whole would be tarnished by this, and potentially the excising of an entire branch of it's overseas operations, but I'd say it'd be unfair to call for a tarring and feathering of Schmitt, followed by a public castration of the board of directors.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[SydShamino]

Maybe it was Eric Schmidt himself who told them to do this. But we really have no way of knowing

Corporations are people according to SCOTUS. People who engage in fraud with their mouth and left arm can't claim their brain and right arm didn't know about it. The judge in any such case should assume (and order the jury to assume) that if any Google employee knew about the fraud, then Eric Schmidt also knew about the fraud.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

When (and I quote the part you left out):

"The bad press and legal repercussions would outweigh the licensing costs."

Re:Do no evil indeed

[oldhack]

It's a simple narrative - Google's got busted. WTF's got to do with Occam's Razor?

Re:Do no evil indeed

[montyzooooma]

I field calls from companies claiming to be Google at least once a week. They aren't Google, they're people wanting to intermediate between a customer and eg Adwords. It's a scam, pure and simple. Whether this is the case here I can't say for sure, but I'd be surprised if it was official Google policy.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[tripleevenfall]

Frankly I don't see much difference between Google and Microsoft's corporatism and anti-competitive practices, except that Microsoft has had a 20 year head start.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[N1AK]

No and that isn't what he said. Any organisation with tens of thousands of employees will at some point have one do something that is evil/wrong/unethical etc. The difference betweena good and a bad organisation is how they react, whether they consider it when hiring, how diligent they are in checking and how they reward and promote employees.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[wzzzzrd]

I don't think anyone is saying that Google shouldn't be held responsible.

Well then...

Just that it's probably not Google trying to be evil, but some random employee breaking the law.

I think Responsibility does not mean what you think it means.

Otherwise, your argument is non existent. Also, to be "held responsible" means nothing. Either they are responsible or not. Being "held responsible" just means someone thinks they should.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft has a history of pulling dick moves, that the corporate office is fully aware of, and continuing even with large public outcry.

Yeah! We need to led Google catch up if they're going to compete.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[pseudofrog]

With posts like this, you'll have to make a yet another new account fairly soon.

You seem to be advocating stopping the story here and declaring Google pure evil full stop. I prefer a bit more nuance in my analysis.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[erroneus]

In some ways, it kinda does indict the entire organization.... the entire brand anyway.

The personality and integrity of a company is an important and even critical asset and must be guarded and maintained. If Google made the mistake of using the people behind this problem, they put their brand and image in serious jeopardy. Like it or not (call it racism if you want) certain parts of the world exist where lies and deceit are built-in to the game. China is built around bribes and crap like that and US companies are routinely called onto the floor for "doing business" with Chinese people in the way the Chinese people expect.

Sometimes competition is a race to the top. Sometimes, it's a race to the bottom... it's a race to whatever practice yields the best results.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

Note the key words, "Google Kenya" - this is a branch office where some employee is taking a shortcut. This is hardly a condemnation of Google as a company unless and until it's demonstrated that this is either more than an isolated incident or was based on instructions received from corporate overlords.

As other responses pointed out, this went beyond Google Kenya, so your point is invalid. Moreover, even if it were simply Google Kenya, I find your attitude to be terribly naive. If we don't hold parent companies/politicians/military leaders/whatever responsible for the actions of their subordinates and default to the notion that every negative act is that of a rogue, corrupt underling, we nearly eliminate the concept of institutional responsibility. The burden of proof in this sort of situation should be on the institution - there's no reason to assume that an incident was out of line with company policy until proven otherwise.

I suppose you are also ready to condemn the complete rank of the US armed forces, all 1,400,000 of them, as deplorable corpse-pissers?

A chain of responsibility is one (important) thing but if you don't take the whole of the org's history into account when looking at one incident, you are stereotyping the entire group for the (possibly independent) actions of one tiny part of it. We have learned several times in history that stereotyping does not work, facts win in the long run and for the time being anyway, no other Google branches have acted this way...

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Archimagus]

I agree Google is responsible for their employees and will have to pay whatever consequences comes with that. I am just saying that "I" don't think this action makes Google as a whole evil. They may do some evil things, and if this is actually a Google sanctioned thing then yes this is evil. But I have worked in remote offices for companies and we often did things that weren't corporate policy and that's what I see happening here.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[NeutronCowboy]

Not sure what's going on here, as a user-agent string means nothing, and there's a lot of outsourcing going on. There doesn't seem to be anything wrong with the investigation Mocality did, and for the tools they have, it was fairly sophisticated.

What I'd like to know is how Google reacts to this. I'm generally of the opinion that someone is innocent until proven guilty (I've been wrong too many times to be able to still jump to conclusions). This might just be a lot of smoke without fire, but if Google is serious about its reputation, it needs to at least address the issue.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

Google is friendly to Linux and open source kind, so they get a free pass through life, as they're incapable of evil.
It's also okay because other corporations, namely Microsoft, also pull dick moves, this line of reasoning is only valid when it is not used to show that companies other than Microsoft do the things Microsoft does, because they are evil, while Google, not being Microsoft, is therefore a saint.

Welcome to slashdot!

Re:Do no evil indeed

[brainzach]

East Africans and Indians usually have business relationships with each other. It could be that the manager of the Kenyan branch is an Indian.

Both countries are known for having corruption and it would be not be too surprising if some to used their positions to Google to make some money on the side.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[LordLimecat]

Doesnt anyone find it really odd to hear that Google is offering to sell websites when...
A) Ive never heard of Google calling ANYONE, or even having any call centers
B) Im not aware of Google having a business selling or creating websites
C) Scammers will claim ANYTHING that will get you to sign up for something

I mean I get the whole Google is evil thing, but this just isnt Google's style, and it sounds like a classic scam. Especially when the caller starts with "Im from G-o-o-g-l-e-dot-c-o-m".

Really, none of this strikes anyone as strange and out of character?

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

Please, stop boasting about your knowledge of the law if you are totally unable to understand it.

Corporations are legal persons which mean they are seen as a person in their own right and not only as a group of persons.

What it means is that Google can be guilty of something and by Google, I mean, the legal person that is Google, not Eric Schmidt or the guy who held the phone. So, if someone from Google Kenya knew, Google Kenya knew not necessary its CEO not even talking about the international CEO.

Where it becomes even more tricky is that Google Kenya and Google corporation are both legal persons with interactions regulated by a contract which means Google Kenya can be guilty and Google not. But, when you think about it for more than two minutes, it perfectly makes sense because after all they are not subject to the same law.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

Obvious troll is obvious.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, but let's compare it to another corporation. Microsoft. They pull this crap everyday and everywhere, it's company policy, not just a lot of lone employees. So, yeah, we can cut them some slack. Unless you can spot another incident like this in some other part of the world, then it really is just an over ambitious employee.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anthony Mouse]

If some McDonalds somewhere in the world is serving people maggoty burgers, the parent company is going to want to know who and shut them down right away.

Of course they will. But how do you know what is going on here when the only side we've heard from is the complaining side, and this is probably the first that Google Corporate is hearing of it?

Whenever you read a story like this, the first question you have to ask is whether it looks like a part of a smear campaign by Microsoft or another competitor. Did the authors contact Google to get their side of the story? Maybe they actually do have a deal with Mocality and right hand at Mocality doesn't know what the left hand is doing. They're certainly being gigantic dicks by taking the issue to publication first, before calling up the people who they're accusing to get all the facts and possibly have whatever problematic activity shut down right away.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[aintnostranger]

+1

Re:Do no evil indeed

[ScentCone]

Neither is acceptable

Except that each those is often exactly true. In the "just following orders" situation, you go up the food chain until you find out who issued them. In the "I was out of the loop" scenario, you go down the food chain until you find out where the loop's boundaries are.

What does "unacceptable" mean to you? If someone subordinate to you does something of which you would not approve, and about which you did not know ... what, should your entire organization, all the way to the top of the org chart be destroyed? Really?

Re:Do no evil indeed

[suomynonAyletamitlU]

It's not "Everything good is done by Google, everything bad is done by lone employees who do not really represent Google."

It's, "When your employees surprise you by doing something good, reward them and stand by them in the hopes it happens more. When your employees surprise you by doing something bad, punish them and take steps to ensure it doesn't happen." I don't understand what you mean when you say "Take the bad as well as the good." They're setting policy, not watching a crappy TV show, and their actions determine the future of the company.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[geekoid]

Yes.

sometime a group; in a large organization will do something wrong. sometime by accident, sometime on purpose. How the company overall handles it is the critical issues, as well as the behavior going forward.

ti's not an excuse, its reasonable.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[DarthVain]

Out of the loop is to a point.

I have had people call me up for support of some software, or project, or questions about procedure, and it was all news to me.

Where someone somewhere decided that they would include my name/number on an email, or documents pointing to me, to say that I was the contact.

Sometimes I have had to say, if you want me to support something or answer questions about something, or direct something, perhaps it might be a good idea in the future to say, invite me to the meeting, include me on the email, heck how about asking me or telling me in any way.

I mean eventually you will find out, and at that point what you do is what you should get judged on, be it taking responsibility or sticking ones head in the sand.

Also following orders under duress is another. The classic I was afraid I would be killed myself unless I did what I was told sort of thing. To a point it is legitimate, depending on what you are being asked to do and what the situation is, however at some point you will likely not be under direct duress, and how you act should be how you are judged.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[El Torico]

Destroyed, no; punished, retrained, or replaced, yes.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait...so Occam's Razor tells you that a company would rather PAY for information they could get for FREE? Do you seriously believe that drek?

The fact is, it's cheaper and less work to simply copy someone else's product. Do you think that Google is worried about licensing or legal fees? Come on...they have lawyers on retainer. If the Kenyans tried anything, they'd simply delay and delay until the other company went out of business. That's almost standard business practice, and noone should be surprised by that. Google Kenya (and if Google corporate doesn't do anything about this, then simply Google) crossed the line by practicing - at best - false advertising and then by lying about its association with the local Kenyan company.

Naughty, and I doubt that we'll see Google even attempt to make any restitution. My guess is that the head of the Kenyan office gets slapped on the wrists, a standard nonadmission of guilt will be announced and this thing gets buried. By June, noone will even remember this.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[antitithenai]

Whenever you read a story like this, the first question you have to ask is whether it looks like a part of a smear campaign by Microsoft

Yes. Whenever you hear someone doing bad things, of course the most logical thing to do is to question if it's a smear campaign by Microsoft!

Re:Do no evil indeed

[geekoid]

Yes, it applies with good and bad stuff. Historically, it's highly unlikely this was policy procedure. More likely some Kenyan or Indian person was using there position to make money on the side.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[1u3hr]

y unless and until it's demonstrated that this is either more than an isolated incident or was based on instructions received from corporate overlords. RTFA. They were being scraped both locally and from IPs in Mountain View belonging to Google.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

Whoever was involved in writing and approving the script should all be fired.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Baloroth]

Indeed. Point of fact: Google has rolled out fiber to the general population for at least one city. Anyone using that fiber network will be using an IP registered to Google. That and the claim of an individual over the phone are the only evidence this was in fact Google.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[smitty97]

but I'd say it'd be unfair to call for a tarring and feathering of Schmitt, followed by a public castration of the board of directors.

Unless of course, more shenanigans are revealed.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[jo_ham]

Yes, ideally we should afford them more rope than we give Apple, Microsoft, Facebook or Sony in a similar situation.

We should verify the facts of a story because declaring an entire company "evil". ;)

(although I'm being facetious and pointing out slashdot's usual "due diligence" when dealing with companies that are marked as "enemies", I'm not condoning that we all drop to that level)

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

After the access started to come from freaking Google India's IP address, I'd assume it is indeed Google.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you even use Google to look up that stuff? If you had, you would see that google does have call centers and does create/sell sites for people. Don't be an idiot.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[jo_ham]

This is exactly what slashdot does every time a similar story about Sony, Facebook, Apple or Microsoft comes up, right? Question whether it's a smear campaign by an "evil" competitor?

Certainly every time a story like that breaks there are people on slashdot calling out the journalists for "being dicks" for going to print before talking to the accused to clear up the obvious misunderstandings!

It's hilarious to watch the fanboys start to circle the wagons! (Isn't that what you're meant to say? It seems to be how you respond to fanboys in threads where their respective "do no wrong" companies are threatened).

DISCLAIMER: I'm undecided on the story - it might be nonsense, it might be genuine, and I'm not making any snap judgements about google being "evil" because of it.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

Right. Add the discovery of alien life to your list of lame excuses.

I don't understand why people go to such lengths to defend a major corporation like Google. Perhaps big corporations started to be born greedy-free and I haven't noticed.

Some comments here even imply that Mocality is lying and the story is a fake. Really, guys? Are you that lame to trust Google to be correct until proven wrong? Really?

Re:Do no evil indeed

[jo_ham]

*champing at the bit.

Not trying to be a grammar Nazi, just pointing it out - a lot of people know the term aurally but just misspell it.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Pope]

Corporations are people according to SCOTUS.

What does that have to do with Kenya, where the Google office was located, or India, where the call centre is?

Re:Do no evil indeed

[SurgeryByNumbers]

Any time there are multiple possible explanations, Occam's razor comes into play.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[pairo]

Only, McDonalds is mostly a franchise. But, yeah, sure.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

People who engage in fraud with their mouth and left arm can't claim their brain and right arm didn't know about it.

Not unless they have alien hand syndrome.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

For one, google buys patents to protects themselves and makes them open for everyone to use unlike microsoft or apple.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure... except these people were calling fake numbers set up by Mocality via their "sting operation" - and those fake numbers were only displayed to browsers at the implicated IP addresses that Mocality found in their logs.

The first # seemed to be a WiMax IP somewhere in Kenya, but later views (and subsequent calls) were from IP addresses *clearly* identified as belonging to Google in Mountainview CA (the calls themselves came from Google India however).

So, yeah. This pretty much implicates *somebody* at Google proper. We're not talking impersonation here.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

by your own logic your the real problem because you oversee the VPs

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Sarten-X]

Misunderstood instructions make things even more difficult, as the subordinate was "just following orders" from a superior who didn't think he was giving them!

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Archangel Michael]

It isn't just this, it happens in Politics all the time. Typical Double standard.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems that they were the real deal, given the Google IP

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

I think he's going by history:

MS overtly screws the industry for 20+ years. Something new comes up that looks like it might be MS's fault. Hmmm.... Idunno.
Google has generally not screwed the industry before. A few bad incidents, but mostly nothing. Something new comes up that looks like it might be Google's fault.
But I guess if you've got a short memory and have never been screwed over by Microsoft, then you might give them the benefit of the doubt... every time.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[shitzu]

That is the 20 year head start thing again. To do so, helps Google gain market share NOW. Come back with this talk in 20 years. My prediction is, that by 2020 we hate Google more than we hate msft now.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[epine]

It's very unlikely that that was spoofed or set up, scammers don't generally go to that much trouble. It's far more likely that these are in fact Google originated actions.

Without getting into your theory of probability, which makes my jaw drop, your set theory sucks. You're implying that the non-empty set of scammers who wake up one morning and discover that they are the proud owner of an IP address in a Google managed IP block--without having lifted a finger to bring this about--won't do a little BINGO dance and start speed dialing anyone dumb enough to listen.

Outright lies about having a business partnership with your competitor go far beyond what even a jaded CEO is happy to know nothing about. It's in the same territory as an aspiring 18 year old supermodel accepting rides from strangers because she can't figure out the Paris metro. Google has deep pockets that lawyers lie awake and dream about, should they ever put themselves into a compromised position.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[icebraining]

It's completely true that plenty Slashdotters defend Google unreasonably; I usually do to, since I can't help but like the company as a whole, "evil deeds" aside.

But Microsoft is a convicted criminal and it's perfectly reasonable to offer them less benefit of the doubt.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[eriklou]

Quick pass the SOPA and blanket google with takedowns. /extremes

Re:Do no evil indeed

[ilguido]

This FUD about Google is getting really annoying. A random guy from a Kenya-based obscure society posts an entry blog accusing Google of breaking the law in every possible manner and then the usual suspects start ranting? Come on.
This whole story could be just a bad forgery and nonetheless the Google bashing starts again: I don't know how it works there in Kenya, but where I live if someone is suspecting such a misbehaving the first step is to call the police or the lawyers. Do you know that all those facts(?) the guy is showing us would be null in a trial? What did he achieve doing this? Just bad advertisement for Google and some more clicks for his obscure company, nothing more. This is a non-story, like when Microsoft claims that Linux infringes 200 patents or so. No trial, no way to know the truth, no story.

I post this for the posterity: Naspers to benefit from facebook ipo, Napsters is Mocality's parent company.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[khallow]

I wonder why this was considered insightful? Microsoft hadn't had much opportunity to engage in such games 20 years ago.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[cababunga]

Not a guess. The originating network, however is located in Kenia.
]$ geoiplookup 41.203.221.138
GeoIP Country Edition: KE, Kenya

Re:Do no evil indeed

[GillyGuthrie]

The Google employees involved in this Getting Kenyan Businesses Online project were probably just thinking about their precious bonuses when they chose to lie about Google's relationship with Mocality. The employees caught lying on tape will be fired and any employees who don't pretend to know nothing about this will be fired also. Google has a brand to nurture and so they'll be appropriately apologetic as they always are when they cross boundaries in their pursuit of corporate domination.

However, the Mocality blog moans about how Google manually scraped their database; this is legal as pointed out in an earlier comment.

The blog's claim that Google is offering competing services isn't even accurate because all Mocality does is list websites, not host them... so what does Mocality expect to win from Google?

Re:Do no evil indeed

[religious freak]

plus one

Re:Do no evil indeed

[antitithenai]

Indeed. Point of fact: Google has rolled out fiber to the general population for at least one city. Anyone using that fiber network will be using an IP registered to Google.

No they aren't using Google's corporate IP's.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[GillyGuthrie]

maggoty burgers

You just ruined McDoubles forever...

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

But Microsoft is a convicted criminal

LOL

Re:Do no evil indeed

[khallow]

I hope some day, that you understand how stupid that sounds. Occam's razor applies here, plus it's not at all rare for a remote, poorly supervised branch of a company to do things that are illegal and/or abhorrent to the parent company.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Talderas]

Did you condemn Rupert Murdoch for the News International phone hacking?

Re:Do no evil indeed

[antitithenai]

Yes, Google sells domains and sites http://www.google.com/apps/intl/en/business/domain.html

And Google also calls people when they are interested in providing some services to them. What is news about that? I've talked with them over the phone and in email. Of course, you need to do some actual business with Google and not merely use their search engine, but there is nothing new about this.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[idontgno]

But the opposite problem also exists: Orders phrased with enough subtlety that they can be shielded with plausible deniability.

Ask Thomas Becket about how that works.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Fri13]

Actually you can point so. There are few things what needs to remember:

1) Good boss is one who knows what is happening and makes sure with all his/her power that workers follows guidelines
2) Fool boss is one who does not know what is happening and makes sure with all his/her power that workers follows guidelines
3) Lazy boss is one who does not know what is happening and does not make sure with all his/her power that workers follows guidelines
4) Greedy boss is one who does not know what is happening and does not follow the corporation guidelines and law
5) Stupid boss is one who does not know what is happening and does not know how to hide his/her tracks about wrong doing

Is it simply possible that Google CEO or any other operative chief in Google did not know that was happening?
Is it simply possible that person who called didn't work with Google?

CEO and board should be directly responsible for everything what the corporations does, unless they can proof that workers hide the truth from him/her/them.

In small corporations, such hiding is not so easy to do as you see daily your boss and boss is always knowing what is happening. But in international corporation where you have tens of thousands workers in different countries, it is simply impossible. It is not excuse but a fact. And even then, if CEO/Board did not know something illegal or inmoral was happening, it is their responsible to fix things. If they cant, they need to be changed.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

Then how do you explain away the WHOIS information? Just a coincidence?

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

This was all orchestrated by that David Drummond asshole. Some people refer to him as the "cardboard nigger" because he is as fake as it gets.

--

There is a new arrogant asshole in town.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[stanlyb]

I came from a country where such an excuses were common practice, and which lately escalated to blindly reject any wrongdoings no matter how, who, and when it was done. There was a saying: "Collective responsibility is NO responsibility".
So man, sorry to ruin your self-esteem, but you are the stupid one. Once you allow yourself to slip on this slippery road, it will be impossible to go back as you will be at the 7th circuit of hell.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[ScentCone]

punished, retrained, or replaced, yes

Everyone in the company above the highest person who knew about or did the evil deed? The entire company? All of the people who have invested their retirement money in the company, because of a low-on-the-food-chain person acting against policy? How do you define this?

Re:Do no evil indeed

[JTsyo]

Insurance companies do pull something like that. I recently refinanced and have received letters with the name of my bank up top but not of the company who send it. It's obvious that they are trying to pass the letter off as from my bank.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

Using App Engine or Translate as a proxy?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3461252

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

Suck it, they were only selling google services, where is that step three (PROFIT) if it was just a scam?

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Multiplicity]

C'mon... are you really implying that lies and deceit aren't built-in to the game in the US ?

Re:Do no evil indeed

[khallow]

I came from a country where such an excuses were common practice, and which lately escalated to blindly reject any wrongdoings no matter how, who, and when it was done. There was a saying: "Collective responsibility is NO responsibility".

So why do you advocate collective responsibility here? Why blame Google instead of the people who actually committed the alleged crimes? I can see why your country is such a mess.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

I get calls from companies claiming to be Google at least three times a week, or at least I did. After I flush them out with contact information and the ubiquitous "That sounds like a great idea! The owner of my company would like to invest several million dollars, maybe even acquire you, so I don't think the head of investor relations will do, who is really in charge...." I have actually heard people cry when they found out I had engineered them. Of course, I begin the conversation with they guy in charge with "If you call me again, I will bill you, and report you to the FCC. You have been warned."

The only guy who called back was from New York, and he only called back to apologize. The guys who called from Florida who where using a Ottawa Canada call center? He has called three times, and I actually get his personal number to cuss him out a few times a week.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[khallow]

Corporations are people according to SCOTUS. People who engage in fraud with their mouth and left arm can't claim their brain and right arm didn't know about it. The judge in any such case should assume (and order the jury to assume) that if any Google employee knew about the fraud, then Eric Schmidt also knew about the fraud.

The obvious rebuttal is that a corporation consisting of more than one person always is in the position of not having perfect knowledge about the activities of its employees.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[stanlyb]

Man, you apparently don't get it. Let me ask you something, if your boss tells you: MOVE THIS STICK, who will take the responsibility that you moved this stick? YOU? Ah, now you see, when it becomes personal, everybody starts to see.....

Re:Do no evil indeed

[El Torico]

I'm referring to the management chain of any group or individual in an organization; they should be proactive in setting the expectations for ethics and acceptable business practices. Can a CEO be all seeing and all knowing? Of course not, even many think they are. However, when this kind of thing happens, it's usually with the tacit approval of upper levels of management.

Of course not everyone in Google was aware of this, but everyone in Google should have ethics and acceptable business practices training. My employer requires every Employee to take this type of training annually regardless of where they are on the "food chain".

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

You caught that the data was in fact scraped by Google in Mountain View, right?

Re:Do no evil indeed

[ScentCone]

So, answer the question. How much should be done to the people above the person who knew-about/carried-out the wrong act? Should their immediate boss be responsible? That person's boss? That person's boss? People make sweeping statements about something being unacceptable, but never quite follow through and say what they really, in practical terms, mean by that.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Muros]

Yes.

sometime a group; in a large organization will do something wrong. sometime by accident, sometime on purpose. How the company overall handles it is the critical issues, as well as the behavior going forward.

ti's not an excuse, its reasonable.

Not just in large organisations. It applies perfectly well in small companies too. We all have colleagues who aren't quite what we'd wish they were. Sometimes they fuck up. With some people, you realise that fucking up is almost a default outcome and you tailor their portion of the general workload with this in mind. Despite this, they still sometimes get their hands on some inoccuous seeming task and cause mayhem. With important customers. You send in the big guns. You will end up with one of 3 outcomes: you lose the contract, you're left with egg on your face but no long term repercussions, or you're told "OMG you are a fucking lifesaver! Yeah, the cheque Bob was asking about last week is in the post. BTW, I dont want to ever see that other cocksucker on my property again."

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Sarten-X]

All the more reason not to jump to any conclusions, and instead investigate the matter looking for evidence of intent.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

True indeed.

You're a property developer who needs people to move out of blocks you want to demolish? You hire someone to make this happen and just tell them "convince them to move out, I am paying you for results, come back when you are done with the job" and there ends up being broken kneecaps? Then you might not be 100% guilty, but you're not highly innocent either. Your degree of responsibility may depend on actions you have taken before and after the fact.

And in this case that should have included sending out word of whatever-the-hell-happened within the first 20 minutes. I am still waiting.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[khallow]

Man, you apparently don't get it. Let me ask you something, if your boss tells you: MOVE THIS STICK, who will take the responsibility that you moved this stick? YOU? Ah, now you see, when it becomes personal, everybody starts to see.....

He'd have to tell me in writing. And that's not the problem here since Google isn't telling anyone at Google Kenya or that call center in India to commit fraud.

And what is there to "get". You're clearly blaming someone other than the people who actually are doing the wrongs.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[stanlyb]

The second you tell this to your boss, you will be fired. And btw, he will be right.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[stanlyb]

Please, somebody, elevate this guy to "troll" level, as he is apparently not intending to listen to any sane argument, and is trolling just for the sake of trolling.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[rolfeb]

If the IP addresses went back to News Limited, we'd all be calling for Rupert Murdoch's head, right? Why should Google be treated any differently?

Re:Do no evil indeed

[khallow]

The second you tell this to your boss, you will be fired. And btw, he will be right.

The implication was that "MOVE THIS STICK" meant some sort of risky or illegal action. Being fired would be a small price compared to a prison sentence.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[LO0G]

I'll bite Mr. AC (I shouldn't, but I will): References to Microsoft "[pulling] this crap everyday and everywhere"? Preferably something within the past 1-2 years?

If you're going to make a strong claim like that, you had better be able to back it up.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Aighearach]

The fact that we're talking about "Google Kenya" implies that the actual legal entity is probably a local corporation, which is owned by google. So the behavior would have to cross that boundary into Google's corporate offices for "Google" to be guilty. And even then, google would be guilty not of the crime/tort but of conspiracy related to it.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

Um, no: "I was just following orders" is NOT an acceptable excuse, particularly when the action is clearly wrong or against policy. Neither is ignorance of the law an excuse, nor is "others were doing so".

If you don't believe me, ask the folks who got hanged after all those trials in Nuremburg...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Trials

Re:Do no evil indeed

[WML MUNSON]

This is a very serious accusation; Google definitely needs to respond.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Ecuador]

Doesn't anyone find it really odd to see the parent post modded at +5 when...
A) He didn't even do a cursory GOOGLE search to see they do indeed have call centers
B) He didn't do a cursory GOOGLE search to see they are in the website making business
C) It wasn't just a random scam call with all those mounts of damning evidence including logs with IPs, recordings etc (it was an interesting read!).

I mean, I get the whole Microsoft is evil thing, but it does not mean the others are not and mods should at least use some common sense when the poster does not.

Oh, and "Out of character"??? WTH does that mean? Anthropomorphizing a company and extrapolating their character traits from their "Do no evil" marketing slogan? Are you trying to embody the definition of a "fanboi" or does it come out natural?

It is a good thing Google admitted it later (https://plus.google.com/115264064268941645500/posts), people might still be in doubt...

Re:Do no evil indeed

[khallow]

Please, somebody, elevate this guy to "troll" level, as he is apparently not intending to listen to any sane argument, and is trolling just for the sake of trolling.

I suppose it's my burden to tell you that your argument was crap. But rather than dwell on that, let's look over the thread. The whole argument started as a discussion of how much Google was to blame for the actions of a branch. The consensus was that Google's name whether rightly or not would be stained by this affair.

So then the conversation moved on to whether blame was rightly cast on Google. As JustinOpinion correctly noted, we didn't have sufficient information to determine that. You butt in for the first time:

Translated, if something good comes from Google, first we have to understand if it is isolated to a single person, department, by accident, just bad mood, lacking internal culture, and when and only when all other reasons are excluded, we could say: THIS GOOD STUFF COMES FROM GOOGLE. With a little hint of doubt of course.

Here's part of what makes this statement so remarkably stupid. If you actually did do as above, then for many "good" things (such as making a profit or delivering value to the shareholder) there is indeed copious evidence that the effort comes from Google in your sense above, such as being unable to localize the good thing to a particular part of Google and a comprehensive corporate policy at all levels towards furthering that goal.

But it's also dumb from the point of view of motive. Google has strong incentive to do a lot of stuff that is generally considered "good stuff" and strong disincentives to avoid doing "bad stuff" such as committing small time fraud.

I also find it remarkable that you can blather on about responsibility while ignoring a key requirement of responsibility, accountability. Namely, who did what? Without that, your words about responsibility are empty because we are incapable of punishing the people who actually committed the crimes alleged in the article because we don't know who they are.

You don't know who did what, but that doesn't stop you from making poor judgments on little information.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[quarterbuck]

I like google too, but in this case Google admitted they did it.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[stanlyb]

Better go watch "Dangerous Method" movie. Your dirty subconsciousness needs some restrains, if not lobotomy.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[stanlyb]

Your stupidity is just amazing. Your thinking is narrow-minded, that you could penetrate even the atom with ease.
Is your little brain able to comprehend the meaning of the sentence "treat equally"???
Are you able to catch the little sarcasm that i put here and there?
Do you realize that if you use one algorithm to excuse the wrongdoings of one company, it fair and justified to use the same algorithm for all the good doings too?
Are you moron? (don't answer me, no need to ruin your karma further).
And for the last time i make the effort to explain the obvious: GOOGLE is fully responsible for everything done by GOOGLE. I know i know, it should be obvious, but with such a morons like you, i feel the need to say it again and again....

Re:Do no evil indeed

[microbee]

I guess Google learns something or two from Chinese government. In China, when some government employee is involved in some scandal or PR disaster, the government would claim he is just a "temporary worker". Your excuse smells about the same.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[crutchy]

its built into the capitalist system because it is by its nature competitive.

communism has its own problems

a cooperative free market will also have problems, but i believe it will play less on the greed of human nature and focus more on local benefits. if companies are only in business to keep people employed (completely non-profit, with absolutely no shareholders - not even employees) then there is no need to compete because there is no need to increase profit (because there is none). employees expect their salaries to increase a little bit each year, but that is unlikely to lead to any kind of competitive spiral towards the depths of capitalist doom. shareholders are the biggest downfall of a free market. they are the leeches of society. yes there are entrepreneurial folks who take risk in setting up new businesses with their own money, but companies can be funded in other ways if they have a sound business case. there's nothing entrepreneurial about investing in the stock market. its about as risky and entrepreneurial as playing the pokies.

you will also notice that in a cooperative market, mergers would probably be commonplace because of the lack of any need to compete. companies would work together more to develop new products, expand to new locations, and reduce inefficiencies (less reinvention of the wheel).

unfortunately mass realization of the pointlessness of a competitive free market merely servicing the leeching shareholder elite will require massive global economic meltdown. this is gradually happening now, and will continue. eventually the world will wake up and smell the rotting turds that the wealthy have left all over the place. the remaining scars will be massive, and despite major shareholders losing their grip, they will walk away with their prizes and many mum and dad investors will be left with the scraps and debt. the smaller investors will learn their lesson and start over. the elitist few will be left with a huge hole in their income and will learn nothing and blame the rest of the world for their misfortune.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[crutchy]

I'll side with Occam's Razor on this. If corporate wanted this information this badly, they'd have paid for it. The bad press and legal repercussions would outweigh the licensing costs.

you might think the mention of occam's razor gives some kind of scientific credibility, but it doesn't help at all. you forget that google is in business to make money. that is all. if it is cheaper to pillage an plunder, and they think they can get away with it, they will for sure.

particularly in a country like kenya where corruption is most likely expected

Re:Do no evil indeed

[AmberBlackCat]

Google also obviously has a fair number of Slashdot accounts promoting their bullshit. You all went crazy about Bing using Google search results. This is a bit worse.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[ilguido]

Did they? He literally said something like I'm sorry to hear that (from Mocality?), we're investigating. Those seem to me preemptive apologies. By the way, the database was publicly available: Google Kenya vs Mocality Controversy: Scandal or Tantrums?.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Requiem18th]

But rather than a lesson for Google, this should be a lesson for us. Even if Google claims that this was the action of a rouge element and not representative of Google as a whole it still means that you cannot thrust them not to misuse their information, and that's even if they are not lieing which is another possibility altoghether.

So either the corporation will misbehave or an element will misbehave. Either way you shouldn't thrust them, so you should always double check.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[TapeCutter]

The real question is; what makes you think Google is being treated any differently? - I see plenty of posts baying for Google blood.

I find the idea of hating an entire company a bit odd, the company I work for has 150K+ employees, they can't all be micromanaged so shit like this will happen. If due diligence can be shown to have failed*, companies should not be judged by the failure, they should be judged by their reaction to it.

* - eg: Did Google make any effort to ensure that the (non-western) employees in question were aware that the practice is considered fraudulent by western courts.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[jamesh]

Somewhere in the dawn of Google someone wrote "Don't be evil" on a whiteboard. It's just possible that the "Don't" might be getting a little faded...

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Kalriath]

I guarantee you someone is going to spout the OOXML shit at you for that, despite that fact that it's unlikely Microsoft actually paid anyone to vote their way (I know we didn't get paid, even if we didn't vote, but they did mercilessly nag us at a conference).

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Kalriath]

Google in fact does sell domains and hosting, as part of the the Get <Country> Online schemes. They have it going in India, Kenya, Ireland, and I think a few other countries. Hence the reference to GKBO, or "Getting Kenyan Businesses Online" - which is a Google scheme in partnership with one or more companies.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Kalriath]

But Microsoft is a convicted criminal and it's perfectly reasonable to offer them less benefit of the doubt.

"Convicted criminal" is redundant. You were supposed to use that tired bullshit line "convicted monopolist". Boy am I sick of hearing that here.

Anyway, yes I guess it is reasonable to use less benefit of the doubt when talking about Microsoft, key word being: when talking about Microsoft. As opposed to offering Microsoft less benefit of the doubt when talking about Google doing something stupid and illegal. That just smacks of fanboy rationalisation (cognitive dissonance or something is the psychological term is it not?)

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Kalriath]

Most people were already condemning Rupert Murdoch. I don't think there's much opportunity to condemn him for even more.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Demonoid-Penguin]

FTFA:

On this call (first 2 minutes) you can clearly hear Douglas identify himself as Google Kenya employee, state, and then reaffirm, that GKBO is working in collaboration with Mocality, and that we are helping them with GKBO, before trying to offer the business owner a website (and upsell them a domain name). Over the 11 minutes of the whole call he repeatedly states that Mocality is with, or under (!) Google.

If the allegations in this article are true, this is where they really cross the line. Harvesting a publicly available database and then contacting those businesses to sell them something is fine (though a little sleazy for a mainstream business like Google). But then trying to claim that you're working with that company when you're not is just plain fraud. It would be like some random insurance company calling people up and saying "Hi, we're working with your mortgage holder, Bank of Topeka, and would like to offer you a special insurance deal...in conjunction with Bank of Topeka."

In fact, Mocality found out about this whole scam when customers started calling them up and asking for support for their new websites (thinking Mocality were the ones who had sold them the sites). I guess it never occurred to Google that this would happen and that Mocality would want to know why.

We get a similar thing happening here in Australia - a large Sydney based company rings businesses and claims to be Google (I know that they are not) and tries to sell overpriced SEO services. Often the fact that they're not actually Google isn't apparent until the business rings Google to complain about the poor service. On a number of occasions this company has rang my clients and tried to pass themselves off as Google or Google "endorsed" - often within a day or two of putting up a new website (so they monitor our work). I've had several clients who forked out thousands for non-existant SEO (we consider SEO to be part of basic site design - not an add on). In one recent incident the client was conned into paying $AU12K when they already ranked #1, 2, and 3 in search results for the same term.

I'm one of many people who've rung Google and asked why they believe that this company, with so many complaints against it, is allowed to get off with the excuse that their sales staff were either misinterpreted or acting without authorisation.

Google Australia would do well to sack that fat, lying, obnoxious Californian who tries to bury all the complaints. Their failure to sever their relationship with the top Google Ad selling company and the relationship between their advertising manager and the director of that company do them no favours.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[adamofgreyskull]

The logic of your first point is only valid if Google "U.S." is pulling both sets of strings. It's entirely possible for entities outside of the U.S. to outsource sales calls to India ya know. As to the second, Google *is* ultimately responsible for what their branch offices do but let's be reasonable, shall we? If you were in a branch office engaging in fraudulent behaviour to get sales, would you tell your boss? If you were managing a branch office and engaging in fraudulent behaviour to get sales, would you tell head-office?

Re:Do no evil indeed

[icebraining]

"Convicted criminal" is redundant

Sure, if you're using the legal definition of criminal. The most common definition is "someone who committed a crime", therefore every time a crime happens and the perpetrator is not found, there is a non-convicted criminal.

You were supposed to use that tired bullshit line "convicted monopolist". Boy am I sick of hearing that here.

So why did you bring it up if you're sick of hearing it? Seems self-defeating.

Anyway, yes I guess it is reasonable to use less benefit of the doubt when talking about Microsoft, key word being: when talking about Microsoft. As opposed to offering Microsoft less benefit of the doubt when talking about Google doing something stupid and illegal. That just smacks of fanboy rationalisation (cognitive dissonance or something is the psychological term is it not?)

I don't even understand your point. Why would I offer Microsoft the benefit of the doubt when they're not being accused of anything?

Point is, if this story had "Microsoft" instead of "Google", I would be more willing to accept their culpability, which is justified due to their criminal history; there's nothing "fanboyist" about this.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[LordLimecat]

We have used Postini and Google Apps for Business as well as AdWords, and I have never heard of Google calling. Adwords would be understandable as I do not handle marketing, but I DO handle the email side of things and have never even seen a phone number for any google service.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[LordLimecat]

WhoIs is neither enforced nor verified. It is very common to fake.

Additionally, there was no hard link from the phone calls to the WhoIs; that correlation was made by the author of the article, on tenuous grounds.

This could be legit, but it could very easily be scam + overexcitable blogger

Re:Do no evil indeed

[LordLimecat]

You get their credit card, and rack up a bunch of charges? You direct them to place their order on www.google.tz.nw.com, and infect their machines with malware? You verify phone numbers for a robo-calling list?

Re:Do no evil indeed

[WOOFYGOOFY]

I agree. It's not like everyone decided that M$ were dicks for no reason. A US court found them to be dicks. In fact, the court surprised most observers when they detailed just how big a dick M$ had been. So M$ gets no love , but only because they EARNED no love.

I don't know how I would hire and control employees in Kenya and India so as to make sure they never made a dick move. I don't think I could. What I would do is fire anyone who made a dick move.

Let's wait and see what Google does, then update our opinion based on that.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[khallow]

While we're offering free advice, maybe you better go learn how to debate and make arguments.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[khallow]

Are you able to catch the little sarcasm that i put here and there?

The problem wasn't that your argument was sarcastic, but rather that it was stupid. I explained why.

Is your little brain able to comprehend the meaning of the sentence "treat equally"???

First, that is a phrase not a sentence. Second, and this is a very peculiar point to have to make, that phrase never gets used (I searched every post above yours) in the part of the thread leading to your post.

Do you realize that if you use one algorithm to excuse the wrongdoings of one company, it fair and justified to use the same algorithm for all the good doings too?

No. And you shouldn't either. This is part of what makes your post stupid.

And for the last time i make the effort to explain the obvious: GOOGLE is fully responsible for everything done by GOOGLE. I know i know, it should be obvious, but with such a morons like you, i feel the need to say it again and again....

How about the things that aren't done by GOOGLE, but are done by GOOGLE employees, say "rogue" GOOGLE employees? Or by random scammers who claim that they're working for GOOGLE? The very ambiguity of the phrase "done by Google" illustrates one of the problems with your arguments. You haven't thought any of this through.

If I were CEO of Sleaze Inc and looking to deflect blame for some crimes that my cronies and I did, the standard tactic would be to blame some employee, a "rogue" employee, of course, for causing the trouble. But that looks a lot like Innocent Inc who actually does have a rogue employee who subverted the oversight of the company and broke genuine rules and established procedures of the company as well as the law.

Merely saying that in both cases, the business "did" the crime in question and hence is "responsible", ignores that one company was trying hard to prevent the crime in question from being possible while the other is only sorry that it got caught.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[El Torico]

I'll spell it out for you as simply as I can. The person(s) who do something illegal should be reprimanded, retrained, or fired depending on severity. The immediate supervisor should also face the same outcome. The next higher supervisor should, at the very least, be counseled about keeping an eye on the next two or three levels down. It also depends on what any investigation (either internal to the organization or external) reveals. If those higher up are culpable or aware of a crime other unacceptable act, then they should also face the same punishment.

Those at the top of the organization set the culture and guidelines of the organization. Upper levels of Management should define and stress acceptable behavior and the HR department should be charged with ensuring that all of the employees are briefed about acceptable behaviors and applicable laws. They also have the responsibility to investigate and correct abuses.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

Google. One of the finest intelligence gathering agencies, eh, companies in the world....

Re:Do no evil indeed

[nagnamer]

I already hate it more than msft...

Re:Do no evil indeed

[stanlyb]

Better go and read one book, it will not make any difference, but at least after that you could say: I READ BOOK(s)

Re:Do no evil indeed

[stanlyb]

Idiot. Boy, or girl, first RTFA. Then if you still think it is rogue employee, RTFA. Then go to step one.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[khallow]

It is nice that you read books, but that happens to be irrelevant to the problems exhibited in your argument style and substance.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[khallow]

Idiot. Boy, or girl, first RTFA. Then if you still think it is rogue employee, RTFA. Then go to step one.

As someone said (often attributed to Einstein), insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So you're transitioning from stupid to crazy stupid. I thought you might want to know.

The article doesn't have the information to tell me whether this was a case of "rogue" employees or not. I can't imagine why you'd think otherwise.

It actually doesn't even have the information to tell me that Google was involved! Keep in mind all of this is written by the parties claiming to be the target of Google. Logs can be faked and sometimes are.

So no matter how many times I read this article, it's not in itself going to change my viewpoints. There's no point to demanding I reread this article over and over again.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[khallow]

Personally I am. I view all in the military as scum. There are no saints in the military. Anyone who willingly joins the military deserves anything they get. You voluntarily join a group which fights illegal wars and has a large number of its members that support degrading activity against the enemies they're fighting.

So what? You're just proving the other AC's point.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[stanlyb]

I see. You are politician. Even if the dick is in your mouth, you would still insist that it could be an ice-cream. Keep sucking.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[khallow]

You're free to see whatever you want to see.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[tjhart85]

Agreed, you can state that it isn't US Google DOING this (and you would be absolutely correct), but you cannot make the implication that US Google isn't ultimately responsible for this.

I love Google products and prefer their brand of evil to most anyone elses, but that doesn't mean they get a free pass when one of their branches does something insanely stupid.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

This is a common problem that multinationals face.

When staffing a foreign office, it is important (and necessary) to staff local people. The problem is that these people, being part of their local culture, often have views of what is appropriate that are quite different from those of the corporation's home staff.

Training and incentives can help, but a lifetime of immersion in a culture and its values is difficult to fix quickly.

-michael

Re:Do no evil indeed

[Nyder]

Actually no, Google's Indian call centers are involved too, so this is obviously coming outside Google's Kenya's offices. On top of that, Google as the company is fully responsible for all their offices practices. You can't just point out that some other department did it.

but isn't that sort of excuse making that our government, corporations and Catholic leaders do?

Re:Do no evil indeed

[cbiltcliffe]

You realize that Google scrapes the entire web from Mountain View, right?

That really means nothing at all, either way.

Re:Do no evil indeed

[cbiltcliffe]

Unless of course, more shenanigans are revealed.

Which would be why the GP started that statement with "If it's restricted to one or two people"....

Re:Do no evil indeed

[cbiltcliffe]

How about, in order for an ARM architecture device to be WHQL certified for Windows 8, it has to be impossible to install a competing operating system? I seem to remember reading that somewhere recently.....

Re:Do no evil indeed

[LO0G]

Where did they say that? What I read in all the excerpts was that the competing OS needed to built according to the rules that Intel defined when they defined UEFI secure boot.

That's not "impossible" - According to this, it should be possible. And this says it should take about a week's worth of work for any distro to support it.

That's FAR from "impossible".

Re:Do no evil indeed

[cbiltcliffe]

Your information is from 4 to 7 months ago. Since December, Microsoft has changed the requirements to be more strict than what you read previously.
In fact, it was even mentioned on /., so where have you been?

Re:Do no evil indeed

[LO0G]

Check the dreamwidth.org post I cited - mjg calls out (in the comments) that there IS a challenge that the OEM needs to include the distro's cert in the box, but that doesn't mean that Linux is locked out - the Linux distro just needs to work with the OEM to ensure that the cert for the distro is included in one of the set of certs that is included in the box:

"Re: Is there any way for the end-user to load their own keys?
Date: 2011-09-24 02:10 am (UTC)
From: mjg59
Not inherently. It's actually reasonably hard to do - inserting new keys requires that those keys themselves be signed by the private half of one of the keys in the KEK database, so you'd need to give your key to someone who *does* have an entry there (either the OEM or Microsoft), have them sign it and then pass that into the variable database"

I'm not saying that there aren't challenges, but it's NOT impossible. "Requires that the Linux distribution owner work with the OEM" is far from "locked out".

Outright fraud

[antitithenai]

This wasn't just misbehaving. What Google did was outright illegal. Not only did they falsely claim that they have business partnership with Mocality, they also claimed that Mocality is engaging in bait-and-switch practices to try and charge businesses up to $200 for their listing. Mocality said they have never charged businesses and never will.

Such blatant lies aren't just misbehavior, they are pure fraud. Google is trying to destroy their competitor in any way possible and in turn profit from lies. This is not a new practice to Google - they haven't been able to gain market share in social space because Facebook and Twitter got there first (of who did it well), and it's seriously injuring their currently. They are desperately trying to change that with Google+ but they know they're unable to do so because they weren't there at the right time. Google is also facing serious competition in Russia, China, South Korea and a few other countries where local search engines have the largest market share and Google is unable to compete as again, they weren't there at the right time.

Google has a long history of scraping other websites and then dropping them lower in search in favor of their own sites. They have been doing this for ages with hotels, restaurants and similar information. They're also trying to do it with flights information. All of these practices will net Google enemies and most likely antitrust issues. But Google doesn't care - they know how important timing is and they will abuse their position whenever they can to get there. It's a long term goal and Google has managed to get the position where no one can really touch them even if they misbehave. Seriously, they were also found out polluting search engines with paid links. After that they blame someone else and try to seem like a good guy. The most hilarious thing is that most geeks believe them just because they use open source (while ironically their products are all proprietary).

And note that this isn't just Google's Kenyan office misbehaving. They also received calls from Google's Indian call centers engaging in similar practices, so this is a practice accepted from Google's HQ.
On top of that, EPIC has said they will try to get antitrust investigation into Google's introduction of Google+ into search results. People are finally starting to wake up to see how bad Google is and how it abuses other companies.

Re:Outright fraud

[Anonymous Coward]

DCTech, did you just create a new account?

Re:Outright fraud

[Anonymous Coward]

The real question is if it is fraud in Kenya or not.

Re:Outright fraud

[Anonymous Coward]

It's important to note that, there is no hard evidence that it's google at all. It's all circumstantial.

The first IP address is not owned by Google, but the callers identified as being Google. So at this point in the game I would have thought that a scam was going on, and "Google" is just cover for the fraudster.

The second IP from india is owned by Google, and the caller identified as Google. At this point it seems that Google authorized this. But maybe that's not what really happened?

What if someone higher up the chain at Google had decided to open an office in Kenya for sales leads, but the resulting office were poorly trained, or even encouraged to cheat by any means possible (this is what came to mind when I read the transcript sections, as this is similar language that high-pressure sales that commissioned sales take.) Then, maybe for performance reasons, the Google company representative decided to use their India call center to call more businesses in a shorter period of time.

Like I doubt whoever reports to to the Google CEO was directly involved in this. If you know anything about the call center hierarchy , outsourced, even company-owned call centers don't go up the chain at all. It's usually something like...
CSR - CSR team lead - CSR Supervisor - CSR Manager - Call center Director (And this guy only runs the call center, it's only responsible for operations, not responsible for policy) The "Client" eg Google (Keyna) might be the next person up, or maybe there's a Google Africa Business development, before it ever gets to someone in the US.

But from experience, either commissions or some other metric probably caused a loss of policy adherence. If I were to blame someone, I'd blame whoever authorized the script. Somewhere along the line they were saying they associated with Mocality, instead of identifying that they found their contact information from Mocality. At that point something wasn't right.

But it's also entirely possible that Google had absolutely nothing to do with this, and rather someone had scraped the data and selling it to Google but identified as Mocality to Google.

I sure hope someone gets to the bottom of it, because it this is happening in Kenya, it may be happening everywhere.

Re:Outright fraud

[NeutronCowboy]

True, but here's my beef: there's no rational discussion to be had with an astroturfer. It's like arguing with an ad: you can't do it. The arguments of an ad might not necessarily be wrong, but there is not rational discussion to be had.

Think about it for a second: do you really want to have Slashdot become the equivalent of the Superbowl ad segments, or the set of political ads that happen during an election year?

You might want to, but to me it's just trying to yell over noise. I have better things to do.

Re:Outright fraud

[snowgirl]

This wasn't just misbehaving. What Google did was outright illegal

I'm glad that we have a Kenyan lawyer on the boards to let us know this!

In all seriousness, if you're not familiar with Kenyan law, all you can say is that it is most likely (or even almost certainly) illegal, and/or most definitely would have been illegal in the USA.

Re:Outright fraud

[larry bagina]

It is fraud in Kenya.

Re:Outright fraud

[antitithenai]

It is illegal and defined as fraud in both Kenya and USA.

Re:Outright fraud

[NeutronCowboy]

Looks like he sure did. To wit:
- First Post, if a subscriber wouldn't have beaten him to it
- First post with links and long, well crafted argument about how evil Google is.
- Brand new account created for pretty much this story only
- Only comments are MS is great and Google is evil.

The only person who beat him to the punch is a subscriber who can see the results early. My suspicion is that DCTech actually submitted the story.

Re:Outright fraud

[snowgirl]

It is illegal and defined as fraud in both Kenya and USA.

Oh, I'll grant you that it's illegal in the USA. And I'm glad that you're familiar with Kenyan law. I'll grant you there isn't a much more clear cut case for fraud. However, that does not mean that Kenya works the same way as the USA.

Can you give me the specific statutes of Kenyan law that this violates?

Re:Outright fraud

[Anonymous Coward]

If a paid corporate propagandist makes arguments, they're no less valid than if they're made by an impassioned grass roots crusader.

OMG LOL. Wait, you are serious? Slashdot is supposed to be like the Olympics; the joy is because you are watching amateurs at work, some of whom are at the top of their game, while they perform solely for the pleasure of the sport. If you say "well hey why not just let paid commenters have free reign and we won't even call them out for their shit" then you might as well just piss on the 100 year tradition of the Olympics, then move on to the NCAA and every other organization that recognizes the fact that in some cases, money RUINS things. No, we don't want paid fanboys trolling around on slashdot. It's bad enough that we have unpaid fanboys trolling around on slashdot.

Re:Outright fraud

[Anonymous Coward]

The thing that really bothers me about these astroturfers is that they never engage in discussion regarding whether or not they are an astroturfer.

Like, why doesn't this person at least respond and say, "No, I am not DCTech. I am a blah blah blah person and I believe in this cause because blah blah."... I mean, just make shit up, at least. Or write and say, "Yes, I am DCTech. What of it?" That would at least be FUN. Sigh.

Re:Outright fraud

[NeutronCowboy]

Eh, there was one astroturfer (pretty sure it's still the same) who said "Yeah, I'm an astroturfer, here's why I feel it's not so bad." All it netted him was a smackdown. Rightfully so, as his argument essentially was "I'm just here to balance out the opposite fanboys." As if this is all just some sport where the only difference between teams are the colors on the jerseys.

Re:Outright fraud

[nschubach]

I just got bored of trying to fix my karma because some asses went raging and modded down all my comments, resulting in me posting at -1. Easier to just make new account.

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2551548&cid=38214208

I'm 99% positive this is the same person.

Re:Outright fraud

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder if we'll find out much of this story is false? If so, I'd love to see this guy sued for liable and fraud himself. The level of anti-Google astroturffing here has gotten crazy even for Slashdot.

Re:Outright fraud

[Anonymous Coward]

Please note that all those actions are approved by David Drummond. I, unfortunately, had to work for him for a couple of years and he is the biggest asshole I've met in my life. One of the biggest hypocrites as well.

Re:Outright fraud

[Anonymous Coward]

It's like arguing with an ad: you can't do it.

Sure you can. People do it all the time by writing graffiti "responses" on billboards.

Say I ride a train that has a bunch of ads for a brand of whiskey, and these ads all follow a common theme of "Say it without saying it", i.e. "Express your (dare I say it) love for your male friends and relatives without getting all sissy mushy."

If I was feeling witty, I could scrawl "Trouble facing your emotions? Try alcohol." on those ads.

Re:Outright fraud

[theNAM666]

>do you really want to have Slashdot become the equivalent of the Superbowl ad segments, or the set of political ads that happen during an election year?

>You might want to, but to me it's just trying to yell over noise. I have better things to do.

That would pretty much describe the Slashdot of the past 12-18 months for me, yep.

Re:Outright fraud

[Colonel Korn]

If a paid corporate propagandist makes arguments, they're no less valid than if they're made by an impassioned grass roots crusader.

OMG LOL. Wait, you are serious? Slashdot is supposed to be like the Olympics; the joy is because you are watching amateurs at work, some of whom are at the top of their game, while they perform solely for the pleasure of the sport. If you say "well hey why not just let paid commenters have free reign and we won't even call them out for their shit" then you might as well just piss on the 100 year tradition of the Olympics, then move on to the NCAA and every other organization that recognizes the fact that in some cases, money RUINS things. No, we don't want paid fanboys trolling around on slashdot. It's bad enough that we have unpaid fanboys trolling around on slashdot.

I thought Slashdot was "supposed to be" like reality, where arguments exist even if we think it's unfair that they were supported by certain people. I believe that the moderation system separates the shill noise from the shill signal, if it exists.

Legal ?

[Tufriast]

Isn't this illegal in the USA? If it is a US based company can they be sued in the US for doing this? This at least crosses the slander lines, and I'm sure the FTC would love to hear about this. Any attorneys in the audience care to comment?

Re:Legal ?

[antitithenai]

Yes it is illegal in the US, and FTC should really look into Google's practices. Thankfully that is in the works, as privacy watchdog EPIC has complained to FTC and asked them to look into all of misbehaviors of Google.

Re:Legal ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't this illegal in the USA? If it is a US based company can they be sued in the US for doing this?

Yes, and yes. Google cannot wash their hands of this just by saying, "Oh, that's just a branch". Sorry, google the company is responsible for what google the company does.

This will probably be litigated in the US, as google is based there.

Re:Legal ?

[snowgirl]

I'm sure the FTC would love to hear about this.

Yes, yes. The FTC certainly wants to hear about violations of US policy that occur completely overseas.

We may be the world's policeman, but we've yet to get all of our laws applied universally... (I can go to another country, commit fraud, and the US cannot charge me with any crime, and the civil courts would never hear a suit based on that action. Copyright law though, we got that covered, even if you're a British guy who has never stepped foot in the US, we'll still extradite you with no hearing from your local legal jurisdiction.)

Re:Legal ?

[snowgirl]

This will probably be litigated in the US, as google is based there.

That's now how jurisdictions are decided. This case would be tried in KENYA, where the crime/injury took place.

Re:Legal ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope, this is incorrect.

Because this spanned Kenya and India and involved communications across national borders, the parent company of both subsidiaries can effectively be pursued in its homeland, notably Google in Mountain View.

Re:Legal ?

[snowgirl]

Looking at Bowoto v. Chevron Corp., I suppose it's possible they could bring a case, and a judge might not dismiss it out of hand for jurisdiction. But I don't see how a simple fraud case is going to stand up better than "they used military forces to torture us"...

Re:Legal ?

[Anonymous Coward]

The crime/injury took place ON THE INTERNET and everything on the Internet should be decided in the US, no? Or else, why is a UK citizen being deported to the US for running a website?

Real or fake?

[happylight]

So is the person calling actually from Google? Or is it just some scammer claiming to be from Google?

Re:Real or fake?

[antitithenai]

Yes, because later there is Google Indian call centers calling and visits from Google's net ranges.

There were no further accesses from the IP address 41.203.221.138 after 4pm 23rd December. Co-incidence? or had someone realised we were onto them?

However, there were some NEW strange messages from business owners- theyâ(TM)d apparently been contacted by a call centre in India with the same promise of a website.

NetRange: 74.125.0.0 - 74.125.255.255
CIDR: 74.125.0.0/16
OriginAS:
NetName: GOOGLE

Re:Real or fake?

[Synkronos]

The whois info, at least for the Indian access, has Google details, not something your regular scammer would take the time to register. Google have also launched the GKBO initiative which lends more circumstantial credence to the conclusions.

Re:Real or fake?

[Anonymous Coward]

RTFA and look at the details.

Re:Real or fake?

[Anonymous Coward]

A scammer who sells Google products? Why would they?

Re:Real or fake?

[jamiesan]

He left a voice message something along the lines of "Hello, I am Abdul Sallah Muhammed, and I am the legal counsel of an estate that has 20 million dollars. You are the last known heir that we have been able to locate. Please give me all your contact information along with your bank account information so that we can send you your inheritance!

Re:Real or fake?

[whoever57]

Yes, because later there is Google Indian call centers calling and visits from Google's net ranges.

While the evidence does look damning, there is no direct evidence that the calls came from a Google call center. There is clear evidence that the numbers being called were scraped from one of Google's IP addresses, but it is possble that a rogue employee is passing the IP addresses to someone who then pretends to be Google. The claim to be calling and promoting what appears to be a Google property (GKBO) may not be true. Mocality should have had someone pay the $200 via the call center and then see where the money really went.

Am I missing something...

[Anonymous Coward]

Is there any proof that this is actually google and not someone impersonating a google employee?

Re:Am I missing something...

[pe1rxq]

Some of the ip addresses they use are registered to google....
At the very least it is a very good impersonator.

Re:Am I missing something...

[Smallpond]

Is there any proof that this is actually google and not someone impersonating a google employee?

Yes.

Re:Can we get a better source?

[antitithenai]

It's not just some random blog, it's the company blog. But if you want to read it from some other source, here is TechCrunch.

Re:Can we get a better source?

[Synkronos]

It's the Mocality blog, blogging about Mocality's own investigations, into things that were done to Mocality. How much closer to the source do you want?

Re:That is Google KENYA's responsibility.

[antitithenai]

So if Google creates single department that does all their evil stuff, they're still not evil company? How far will you go to defend Google and not see through their bullshit?

Re:That is Google KENYA's responsibility.

[Synkronos]

Apart from the bit about it continuing on from Google India's offices. Read the whole article before commenting.

I agree, Let's put Brin in a Borg outfit

[Anonymous Coward]

This is a rumor posted on a blog. Really, Slashdot?

Why don't you change Google's icon to Sergey Brin as a Borg while you're at it?

The Gates borg icon is now an anachronism, while a Brin one is quite relevant given their ongoing shady practices

Re:That is Google KENYA's responsibility.

[unity100]

it is not a fucking department. it is a local branch in kenya, then, some branch in india. doing exactly the same things all kenyan and indian businesses do. are you saying that google has instituted a policy for scam-calling business owners to trick them into paying them to have a domain name and a website hosted on google's servers ? does google have a hosting business ?

Re:That is Google KENYA's responsibility.

[unity100]

google's india offices have tried to sell them domain name and web hosting. so ?

To the people stating this is fake...

[Tufriast]

I'd hate to pour some cold water on your hot heads - the man has proof, recorded proof. In addition he has IP logs and tracebacks to Google HQ. He has enough evidence to stand in a court of law and press charges against Google inside of the United States. He's checked with ISPs and double-checked over a period of many months. This is no fake; and this is a huge, huge, blow to Google.

Re:To the people stating this is fake...

[Anonymous Coward]

Because logs are soooooo hard to fake.

Re:To the people stating this is fake...

[MetalliQaZ]

This is no fake; and this is a huge, huge, blow to Google.

Uhm...what? I think that the only thing that could possible be a huge blow to Google would be from large-scale government. Think losing an anti-trust case or being kicked out of China.

This? This is a blip, a hiccup. They will probably stop the blatant fraud and move on, and /maybe/ apologize.

Re:To the people stating this is fake...

[Anonymous Coward]

Everything you said is true except the last bit, "this is a huge, huge, blow to Google." Cynically, there is no way some small Kenyan firm is going to be able to bring a serious lawsuit in the US against Google. Google's legal team would crush them, tie them up in series after series of motions, and bankrupt Mocality before any verdict could hope to be passed. Such is the nature of large corporate legal teams.

Re:To the people stating this is fake...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd hate to pour some cold water on your hot heads - the man has proof, recorded proof. In addition he has IP logs and tracebacks to Google HQ. He has enough evidence to stand in a court of law and press charges against Google inside of the United States. He's checked with ISPs and double-checked over a period of many months. This is no fake; and this is a huge, huge, blow to Google.

It'll be a small shock to Google to have to rethink their preconception that African startup businesses are staffed by a bunch of chumps.

Re:To the people stating this is fake...

[Anonymous Coward]

This instance of misbehavior would constitute damning evidence that a prosecutor could leverage in an anti-trust or fraud case. Perhaps you've never heard of Chinese water torture.

Re:To the people stating this is fake...

[MikeBabcock]

If so, he should take it to court and let it stand.

The court of public opinion is only used by people without sufficient proof to use a real court.

Re:To the people stating this is fake...

[delinear]

What "proof" does he have? He has IP logs to show two different googlebots crawled his site at different times? We have those too, for dozens of sites. It's standard practice - several bots do the crawling (I'm not sure if this is for cross validation purposes or if it simply speeds up the propogation of the result indexing across their server farms) so there's nothing intrinsically suspicious about one Google IP visiting his sites one month and a different IP at a later date. Aside from that all he has is people claiming to be from Google. Claiming to be from a big, well recognised company is one of the oldest scams in the book.

On the flip side, Google don't sell hosting. On top of that, they're one of the richest companies in the world and you think their new policy is to scam a few people in Kenya out of a couple hundred dollars for hosting packages? That's like saying Donald Trump likes to supplement his income by mugging people in the park - sure it's not necessarily untrue but it's so ridiculous it's hard to swallow. Realistically, which is more likely, that explanation, or that this is either a hosting company with shady business practices or a group of scammers out to collect CC numbers? It's worth noting also that he's not mentioned trying to get a response from Google (and if he's tried he's not included their response).

I would have been more convinced had they asked for some contact details from the caller, something like "I'd really like to sign up but I have to rush into a meeting, can you give me your number/email address and I will call back when I'm free?". That way, they would have had at least something other than the person's word for it that they were from Google. They either would have given the number/email which could have been traced back to Google or more likely they would have made some excuse not to do so (which they'd have no reason to do if they were legitimate). I have to say their "investigative" skills leave a lot to be desired and it's pretty flimsy evidence they're using to jump immediately to the conclusion that this is definitely Google. Did they even try calling Google Kenya and asking to speak to any of the 6 callers to verify they actually work there?

Sounds like either a company fell for a scam or a company is scamming tech sites with fake news in order to up their pageviews... (and I'm not saying this from a "Google can do no evil" standpoint - if it does turn out this is true Google should definitely be made to pay, I just don't think anything here looks like proof yet)

Re:To the people stating this is fake...

[drinkypoo]

The court of public opinion is only used by people without sufficient proof to use a real court.

That's a lot of nonsense. There are other reasons, like expecting to be bludgeoned in the court of public opinion so badly that you'll fail in court if you don't fire the first shot and thus get your message out first, or expecting to suffer in a legal circus and so bringing your message into the public eye first in an attempt to forestall it.

Re:To the people stating this is fake...

[Hatta]

How does the US have jurisdiction over this? Wouldn't Kenya be the proper venue?

Re:To the people stating this is fake...

[NeutronCowboy]

I think this is a far more interesting proposition than just assuming that Google is trying to scam a Kenyan upstart out of a few hundred dollars for hosting packages. There's no reason to think that Google can't do it, but the evidence so far is pretty weak.

Re:To the people stating this is fake...

[Anonymous Coward]

And a huge huge "win" for Apple and Microsoft, which is why we are seeing so many anti-Google zealot moderators downvoting any comments that might be in any way skeptical of the claims made in some random blog post. Three two one zero.. this post will be moderated flame bait.

Re:To the people stating this is fake...

[snowgirl]

In addition he has IP logs and tracebacks to Google HQ.

Google HQ in both Nairobi, Kenya, and Hyderabad, India. Not Google HQ USA.

He has enough evidence to stand in a court of law and press charges against Google inside of the United States.

This would get thrown out due to jurisdiction issues in the first hearing. The alleged crimes all occurred in Kenya, and all alleged perpetrators/tortfeasors are in Kenya and India. It fails like nearly every standard for determining jurisdiction in the USA. (Except personal jurisdiction over Google, Inc., but the other alleged perpetrators/tortfeasors have no personal jurisdiction in the USA.)

Re:To the people stating this is fake...

[mkuki]

Everything you said is true except the last bit, "this is a huge, huge, blow to Google." Cynically, there is no way some small Kenyan firm is going to be able to bring a serious lawsuit in the US against Google. Google's legal team would crush them, tie them up in series after series of motions, and bankrupt Mocality before any verdict could hope to be passed. Such is the nature of large corporate legal teams.

Mocality doesn't have to bring a lawsuit against Google in the U.S, they could bring it in Kenyan court (because claiming to have a relationship with Mocality falls under 'fraudulent Business Practices'), and even then, they might not have to go to court. The bad publicity is enough to put a serious dent in Google's Africa Strategy. Also, this is spreading far beyond just Kenya (where it is a big story), it's on Techcrunch and a number of other sites.

Re:To the people stating this is fake...

[ThatsMyNick]

The IPs were registered to Google, Mountain View, CA, so its very much in the US jurisdiction.

Re:To the people stating this is fake...

[Eunuchswear]

On the flip side, Google don't sell hosting.

Well, in fact they do.

Google in partnership with Safaricom, Equity Bank and Kenic announced today the Getting Kenyan Businesses Online (GKBO) program, an initiative aimed at thousands of Kenya SMEs, including sole traders, who do not have a website or online presence. According to Google, together with its partners, “GKBO will provide free or subsidized services to help businesses to use web and internet technologies. This includes supporting organizations that provide assistance for small and medium businesses, as well as other industry organizations that are aligned with the aims of the initiative.”

http://www.kenyanlist.com/kls-listing-show.php?id=68124

From the call:

Caller Yes, um,
    I’m calling you from Google Kenya. I’m (inaudible)
[...]
Caller:
No, it’s absolutely free, free of charge. Ok, kuna fee kidogo, maybe ya hosting. Hosting part of it, utakuwa unalipia mia mbili kwa mwezi. (Translation: Ok, there’s a small fee for hosting of Ksh. 200 per month.)

Business owner:
  Two hundred per month?

Caller:
  Yah, which is not that much coz...(inaudible)... and we want to make business out of this.

Business owner:
  So you charge two hundred per month for hosting?

Re:To the people stating this is fake...

[Sarten-X]

IP addresses can be easily hijacked, and it's still no indication of actual wrongdoing within US jurisdiction. Perhaps Google gives IP addresses out to any company who wanted to pay them $10/month, as so many ISPs do. According to the post currently below this one, that's exactly what Google's done.

Assuming that Google is ultimately at faulty, the only way I see where Google would be liable under US law, would be if each of the involved branches were first found to be liable. Then there's a reasonable chance that the branches were coordinated by the parent corporation, and it can be pursued.

Re:To the people stating this is fake...

[Anonymous Coward]

All is fair in love, war and business. Major U.S. corporations file suits all the time to gain, protect and extend market share. If they are fined and ruled against they counter with more law suits down the line. Win-win for everybody but the weak players and the consumer; and that's the name of that tune.

Re:To the people stating this is fake...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, we all know that anything anti-Google is fabricated, bogus, FUD and simply wrong, while anything pro-Google and anti-$Competitiors_To_Google must be naturally true.

BTW : no random blog, official company blog. Yes, hard to accept and swallow.

Gosh, how I despise Google Fan who really think Google can do no wrong and is the saviour and the unsung hero of geeks.

Re:To the people stating this is fake...

[antitithenai]

It's not Googlebot, it's human visits.

Re:To the people stating this is fake...

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder if the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act might apply in this case. In which case, this might very well bring blowback onto Google US.

Re:To the people stating this is fake...

[Kalriath]

You're not entirely correct. Google's chief selling point is that you're supposed to be able to trust them - they don't do bad things. Their reputation is one of their biggest assets, and damage to that is not going to go unnoticed.

Re:To the people stating this is fake...

[snowgirl]

The IPs were registered to Google, Mountain View, CA, so its very much in the US jurisdiction.

Do you listen to how stupid you sound?

Re:To the people stating this is fake...

[eionmac]

USA law* (and UK) law covers the actions of any subsidiary of a parent company where 'claimed fraud' or 'claimed misuse of 'trade marks' or 'contractual relationships' {i.e YYY claiming to be working in partnership with XXX] is done by subsidiary. The parent company needs to act quickly to stop any misdeed by a subsidiary. Otheerwise easy to bride, corrupt steal by use of a subsidiary without any recourse.

Re:To the people stating this is fake...

[ArsenneLupin]

It's worth noting also that he's not mentioned trying to get a response from Google (and if he's tried he's not included their response).

What response? Did you ever try to ask Google anything? First, any e-mail adresses of Google are surprisingly difficult to find... And second, if you do manage to find one, there will never be any response (even from those addresses that don't bounce).

If you've got a google address that responds, I'd be interested. Indeed, I'd like to discuss with them about their way of interpreting links into plain text (which short-circuits any rel="nofollow"), and also spams web server logs due to shorted http://server/.../page.html links.

And then, I'd like to ask how to make spam from google groups stop (apart from putting them into a Teergrube... but even that only cures the symptoms, as during the rare times where our Teergrube goes down, google groups spams still trickles through!)

Re:To the people stating this is fake...

[MikeBabcock]

If you believe that, I'd ask you what you believe a fair trial to be.

I'm sorry but popular opinion is actually counter-productive to fairness in a trial situation. "Have you heard of the accused or read anything about them? yes? Go home. Next juror please."

And when you know you'd lose in a fact-based trial situation, you can go out and disseminate whatever biased data you want to the public and rather than having anyone do the detective work or research on whether your statements are valid, just bet on most people agreeing with your spin.

Gone Rogue!

[Anonymous Coward]

In comapnies the size of google, things liek this are bound to happen. It is highly unlikely that these actions were directed by top officials at het company. thisis probably one rogue manager or employee somewhere.

Re:Gone Rogue!

[MMAfrk19BB]

Everything done under Google's name is by definition, done by Google. The company is not entirely composed of Sergey Brin and and his Brinions (TM) in Mountain View. It is everyone who gets paid by Google worldwide. So, if the branch offices engage in shady business, then then branch offices in another country engage in shady business, then someone at HQ engages in shady business, then Google as a whole is engaged in trying to butt-fuck a smaller, leaner, more competitive company out of existence with shady business practices. It's a shame; I used to really like Google. But then I started finding out what they do when they can't easily and quickly dominate a market, and now I don't anymore.

Re:That is Google KENYA's responsibility.

[Anonymous Coward]

Cause Android is open! Microsoft is killing Android and Apple is for morons! Come on, this is slashdot!

Re:That is Google KENYA's responsibility.

[wytcld]

Engage in racist slander much? Read the article. Kenya is not so corrupt a place. I have close friends who worked for years there (in other business sectors) who confirm that.

Also, is it your view that branch offices of American corporations, if they should find themselves somewhere more corrupt than America, should join in the corruption? That's an odd view. There's specific American law against that, in fact, with strong penalties against a firm's American corporate operation if it can be proven that it enabled or condoned corrupt practices abroad. Whether American law covers the specific varieties of corruption alleged here I can't speak to. But do you really believe that there's nothing wrong with American corporations having foreign branches and subsidiaries engage in corruption?

Re:That is Google KENYA's responsibility.

[antitithenai]

If you go by that logic then it's probably ok for you that Google bribes polices and officials where it's more common (hello, Russia and USA) and there is nothing wrong with that? If it was socially tolerated to have slaves and killing other human beings was lawful in the country, there would be nothing evil about Google branch doing so too?

revised motto:

[Thud457]

"Don't be caught being evil"

Many different possibilities.

[Anonymous Coward]

I haven't RTFA, but I have read Boingboing's article about the same thing. As far as I can tell, IP address != company. You know, it's pretty easy to make requests from fake IP addresses if you're the ISP of your target.
Yet anothe possibility is that the scammer has actually sent the requests from Google's servers. It isn't impossible to take over some of Google's servers and use them to make some requests.
Another possibility is that some of Mocality's own employees are the scammers, and they have planted fake requests in the logs to desinform anyone trying to investigate the scam.
And these are just some of the many different possibilities.
(Yes, I know I will not get modded up, but I don't care. I'm just an AC.)

Re:Many different possibilities.

[stanlyb]

So, these guys tried to impersonate Mocality by impersonating Google Kenya and Google India!!!!! Oh my god, help me to solve the Zen Paradox.

Re:Many different possibilities.

[Smallpond]

I haven't RTFA, but I have read Boingboing's article about the same thing. As far as I can tell, IP address != company. You know, it's pretty easy to make requests from fake IP addresses if you're the ISP of your target.

Brillant. A new business plan:

1. Set up fake IP for your competition
2. Call your own customers and persuade them to switch to the competition
3. ?
4. Profit!!

Re:Many different possibilities.

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't want to be mean but you are discarding the eventuallity because it would be a stupid operation for them.

Unfortunately for you, by applying the same reasonning, it becomes hightly unlikely that Google did it.
Seriously, 3000 customers for a website is nothing for Google. Selling websites is not even their main business.
They are selling advertisement. Why would there first move be to try selling websites ?

Futhermore, think about it, they are Google. They don't need to claim being tied to a startup to gain respectability. Their name already stands by itself. I mean, if they really wanted to gain website clients, they could just legally harvest the public database and do the callings without pretending to be working with Mocality.

So, let that maxim of Cassius apply, cui bono.
Obviously, Mocality is gaining a lot of free advertisement with this which makes them suspect.
Even more suspect is the fact that they jumped to the public annouce without trying to contact Google.
It's by no way proper business practices.
A scammer is another likely possibility.

Re:Many different possibilities.

[Eunuchswear]

So, tell me how the scam works.

1. Use heavy duty spoofing to do lookups that look like they're coming from Google's networks.
2. call people, pretending to be Google.
3. sell them Google products.
4. ????
5. Profit!

Re:Many different possibilities.

[Sarten-X]

4 is "Add a large markup by charging extra for cheaper/free services, when all you really do is forward everything to Google"

Re:Many different possibilities.

[Anonymous Coward]

Srsly?

Re:Many different possibilities.

[Kalriath]

Of course, and Google apologises when they did nothing wrong.

I find that even less likely then your "likely" possibilities.

Re:That is Google KENYA's responsibility.

[Synkronos]

I would suggest that you actually read the original article before posting comments next time, it helps make them a tiny bit relevant.

Re:That is Google KENYA's responsibility.

[El Torico]

"Honestly, I'm not evil, just my hands are!"
(Drops knife)

Response

[davidzimm]

Has anyone from Google responded to this yet?

Re:Response

[rbrausse]

according to boingboing Google will reply "soon"

Re:Response

[Smallpond]

Yes. The Register asked them and they said:

"We're aware that a company in Kenya has accused us of using some of their publicly available customer data without permission. We are investigating the matter and will have more information as soon as possible."

Note that they are already trying to duck the fraud and focus on the less serious "use of publicly available information" part.

Re:Response

[fightinfilipino]

Yes. The Register asked them and they said:

"We're aware that a company in Kenya has accused us of using some of their publicly available customer data without permission. We are investigating the matter and will have more information as soon as possible."

Note that they are already trying to duck the fraud and focus on the less serious "use of publicly available information" part.

to be fair, of course they're going to focus on something that's legal and not comment on something which might be a violation of the law. i seriously doubt any corporation is going to admit guilt to something they haven't investigated themselves first. all anyone knows at the moment was that one of Google's branches and one of their Indian call centers were doing bad things. there's no proof that said things were authorized or approved by Google's management.

now we wait to see how Google corporate actually reacts to this information. until then, it's best to hold off judgment.

and for those of you who would be upset that Microsoft would immediately be pig piled for doing the same thing, consider that the anti-monopoly actions taken against Microsoft so far were on things clearly approved by Redmond (like IE integration into Windows, locking customers into Office, that sort of thing). if MS were to do something similar to what Google Kenya apparently has done, i would be at the head of the line of people saying "wait up! we still don't know the facts!"

Re:Response

[Kalriath]

Yes, Google has issued a statement and apology.

Re:Response

[Anonymous Coward]

Assuming the story is true, some number of Google employees are assholes who deserve to be locked up. But judge the company as a whole based on who those assholes turn out to be, how they got away with it, and how the company responds after a couple days... not on the syntax of PR fluff given to reporters while people were scrambling to figure out WTF happened.

Re:That is Google KENYA's responsibility.

[pe1rxq]

So according to you google shouldn't make an 'evil' department, but instead they should start an 'evil' branch and all is well?

Re:Can we get a better source?

[Alsee]

How much closer to the source do you want?

I won't believe it until I get to read it in the original Klingon.

-

Re:Can we get a better source?

[Anonymous Coward]

Moron. Been around long enough to have a 6-digit UID, but apparently not long enough to know that you should RTFA.

Google cult members

[Anonymous Coward]

Damn, there are some pathetic Google cult members among the techie community.

It's really pathetic how deluded most of you people are - that you really think Google is above and beyond reproach, and that they would never do anything bad to you.

Obviously whoever fleeced Mocality...

[iamacat]

Would have no moral scruples about fleecing Google as well. I think there is 99% chance that this is either a criminal consultant, hacked servers or plain social engineering. Stefan should have purchased "website hosting" (which Google doesn't offer) and informed authorities of the resulting money trail (but it's understandable that he didn't, being a tech guy rather than a professional detective).

Re:Obviously whoever fleeced Mocality...

[Eunuchswear]

Stefan should have purchased "website hosting" (which Google doesn't offer)

People keep saying this.

It isn't true.

Google (in association with Safaricom, Equity Bank and Kenic ) do offer "website hosting" as part of the Gkbo – Getting Kenyan Businesses Online - project.

Re:Obviously whoever fleeced Mocality...

[Anonymous Coward]

"website hosting" (which Google doesn't offer)

Google search "Kenyan Business Online". It's a venture set up by Google Kenya to offer free or subsidised hosting to Kenyan businesses. (You'll have to wade through a bunch of results about the Mocality fraud claims to get to the GK/KBO press releases, at least Google isn't hiding the search results.)

I understand why some people think it might be 3rd party fraud using Google's name, because I get calls all the time from "Microsoft" about a problem they "detected" on my computer (and if you believe them, apparently they talk you through giving them complete remote access to your machine. Then things start to get expensive.) However, the refusal to read further is simple Google fanboi-ism. This is not someone's mother misunderstanding a Nigerian scam, it is a well researched, well documented, straight up fraud claim against Google. It's not a "rumour" on "some blog". It's a claim of fraudulent business practice by one company against another, with logs and recordings to back it up.

Either Google committed fraud, or Mocality is fraudulently claiming they did.

Amazingly...

[vikingpower]

... I am not surprised. Why not ? Because very large entities like Google lack, by definition, the internal social control to "do no evil". What can go wrong must and shall somewhere, somehow, go wrong.

Google's actual corporate moto

[alexo]

Don't admit to being evil.

Re:Can we get a better source?

[msauve]

"This is a rumor posted on a blog."

And this is just an unmoderated discussion posted on a website. What's the problem?

Re:Can we get a better source?

[Anonymous Coward]

The TechCrunch article is just a rehash of the original blog post (citing it as a direct source). Why would you think that adds any new or corroborating information?

Re:That is Google KENYA's responsibility.

[radtea]

doing exactly the same things all kenyan and indian businesses do.

"All"? How do you know? And why don't you mention that all human organizations in all nations are apt to do the same kind of thing: humans lie, cheat and steal. All humans, regardless of race, religion, nationality or party, have equal propensity to do this. Anyone who says otherwise hasn't been paying attention. Good individuals are good because of their individual choices, not the classes you choose to use to categorize them.

are you saying that google has instituted a policy for scam-calling business owners to trick them into paying them to have a domain name and a website hosted on google's servers ?

He isn't "saying" that. It is, on the evidence what Google is doing. It is clearly corporate policy, not some rogue group within the company, given the scale and scope of the operation and the IP hits from Mountain View.

does google have a hosting business ?

Yes, they do. Did you not read the article?

So your outrage claims amount to: 1) racist-nationalist nonsense implying that an American company would not engage in such fraudulent behaviour, 2) a rhetorical question asking if Google is doing exactly what Google is doing and 3) a rhetorical question asking if Google is selling a product that Google does indeed sell.

You've declared your ignorance of American (and human) business practices, you've declared your ignorance of the actual evidence for Google's corporate policy on this behaviour, and you've declared your ignorance of Google's product offering in Kenya. On the basis of those declarations you have reached a conclusion, but I'm not sure what the conclusion is.

Re:That is Google KENYA's responsibility.

[unity100]

google wouldnt. but, people employed in google russia, definitely would. bribe or die ? anyone would choose bribe. that does not mean that google ireland is approving it. they end up approving it if they dont take action on it.

yeah

[unity100]

and i had a kenyan client who told me that when they went to atms to withdraw, they carried shotguns with it. go figure what goes about in corporate practices.

Re:yeah

[sexconker]

and i had a kenyan client who told me that when they went to atms to withdraw, they carried shotguns with it. go figure what goes about in corporate practices.

Look, it's unity100 being a moron again!

You're ignorance/racism is causing you to make up stories about Kenya.
Your poor grammar is causing you to make up stories about ATMs armed with shotguns.

Re:yeah

[mkuki]

and i had a kenyan client who told me that when they went to atms to withdraw, they carried shotguns with it. go figure what goes about in corporate practices.

Look, it's unity100 being a moron again!

You're ignorance/racism is causing you to make up stories about Kenya. Your poor grammar is causing you to make up stories about ATMs armed with shotguns.

Yup, I'm Kenyan. I don't carry a shotgun to the ATM (in fact, I don't even own your shotgun). unity100 sounds like your typical racist/ignorant troll.

Re:yeah

[unity100]

Look, it's unity100 being a moron again!

wow yes ! that really frightened me from posting my thoughts ! oh god - what if a random zygote in some random country on the freaking internet calls me a moron !?!?! what would i do then !!!

......

you just cant get enough of me. thats your problem. ill keep posting here, however i will, speaking my mind, even if you go red with rage. enjoy reading my posts in which i speak my mind with you having no means to prevent it. and let me go back to ignoring your trolling.

Re:yeah

[Anonymous Coward]

What kidn of bullshit is that? They carried shotguns? DO you know how restrictive firearms laws are in Kenya, you stupid American? Shotguns? You're a freaking lunatic.

Love,

Someone who's lived in Kenya for 18 years.

Re:yeah

[ohms]

I had an American client who told me that he witnessed car chases and fancy explosions on his way to work everyday. Do you even know how restrictive gun policies in Kenya are? Going with a shotgun to the atm? What cheek!

Re:yeah

[unity100]

well, that's what he said.

Re:yeah

[coolsnowmen]

you stupid American?

hey, lets not drag me into this.

Re:yeah

[cbhacking]

High petty crime rate and high levels of corruption in business do not necessarily go together, although I'll agree that this is something I'd be less surprised to see out of Kenya than, for example, Switzerland.

Re:yeah

[cybernanga]

and your kenyan client was probably trolling you!

Localization factor

[Shoten]

It's important to remember something here. This wasn't Google HQ, out in California. This was Google Kenya. Kenya ranked 154th (out of 182) in Transparency International's Corruption Index in 2011. It's not a country that is known for an ethical business climate in general; this will steep into the behaviors of any local business, regardless of who the parent company is. So while the actions of Google Kenya were reprehensible, let's not all assume that Eric Schmidt called them up personally and said, "Hey! I want to see you guys lying about the competition and stealing their information...get to it!" It's a pretty safe bet that this is not what happened.

Re:Localization factor

[Anonymous Coward]

"When in Rome..." eh? I'm with the camp that it was Google's brand/name/company therefore they should be held accountable. Otherwise, companies should just move to these corrupt countries so people like you give them free passes.

Re:Localization factor

[radtea]

It's important to remember something here.

Yes, let's. American executives are paid more than anyone else in the world because they are supposedly able to make a huge difference to the performance of their company.

If you're going to claim at the first sign of misbehaviour that the executives have no control at all over anything anyone at the company does you should be following it up with an immediate rant about how over-paid they are.

Otherwise you just look like a hypocritical shill for corporate America.

Re:Localization factor

[Eunuchswear]

It's important to remember something here. This wasn't Google HQ, out in California. This was Google Kenya. Kenya ranked 154th (out of 182) in Transparency International's Corruption Index in 2011. It's not a country that is known for an ethical business climate in general;

Luckily for Kenya not everyone thinks like you:

I moved to Africa from the UK 30 months ago to be CEO of Mocality. When I moved, Kenya’s reputation as a corrupt place to do business made me nervous. I’ve been very happily surprised- until this point, I’ve not done business with any company here that was not completely honestly conducted. It is important for global businesses to adapt to local cultural practice, but ethics are an invariant.

Stefan Magdalinski
Nairobi, Kenya

Re:Localization factor

[Sarten-X]

This just in: Guy accusing company of misconduct emphasizes how ethical everybody else is! Film at 11.

Really? I spent time in Africa (volunteering in Ghana), and nearly every business, individual, and official I dealt with was corrupt to some degree. I was actually surprised when a taxi driver reminded us of the agreed-upon rate, and it was the same as what we'd agreed.

Now, we're not talking Western white-collar corruption, where an executive will duck out to play golf and write it off as a business expense. We're talking about a construction company who won't start work until you start paying them so they can get supplies, then pay a little more to fix the tire on their truck, then more for gas, then more to hire a new worker, then more to rush the job that's now running behind. Contracts mean nothing, because the court officials will decide in favor of whoever offers them the biggest bribe without getting caught by the few people in government who think that corruption is wrong, despite its widespread cultural approval.

If you want to get things done in Africa, the best way is to hire a local who can navigate the local politics (because he grew up in the village, is a member of the local tribe, and has been in good standing all his life), and bribe the local chief to pressure the village to help you. Give that local a budget for bribes, and just accept that they happen. It's certainly not the Western standard of business, but it works. Things get done, the bribes are just a cost of doing business, and the locals appreciate that you're playing their game, instead of forcing your silly ideals onto their ancient traditions.

Re:Localization factor

[antitithenai]

Nice how you lump how continent in one convenient package. You do know that even in Europe countries differ A LOT and some countries have much more corruption while in some there isn't almost any corruption? And Europe is much smaller continent too.

Re:Localization factor

[Sarten-X]

From the experiences of other volunteers I've worked with (including a few from Kenya), most places in Africa have roughly the same problems, differing primarily in how open they are about their problems. Ghana's (and Kenya's, and South Africa's, to name a few) problems are mostly hidden behind a facade of "we can work just as well as the West", but under the surface, the dynamics are more similar to other African countries than to anything in the West.

Re:Localization factor

[ohms]

How did this devolve from a discussion on the unethical practices perpetrated by a Google (yes, Google), to a discussion of how corrupt the system is. The stuff google did is orthogonal to the corrupt culture. Not, the blame is shifting from that behemoth to "ok Kenya is corrupt". This to me seems like some folks over here are trying to justify Google's actions, or lessen the ethical implications that they carry.

Re:Localization factor

[Anonymous Coward]

+Google India callcenters +Harvesting was done by Google USA

Ip's can be hijacked

[OeLeWaPpErKe]

IP address ownership, sadly, doesn't prove anything. Anyone with a BGP connection can hijack any IP address for large parts of the world. And before you say "but surely Google can prevent this" :

Read this

I've been the admin on 3 networks which were IP hijacked now. In two cases it was accidental, in a third case it was not. The situation is bad in North America, seriously disappointing in Western Europe, and beyond outrageous everywhere else. Basically, outside of North America and Europe you can pretty much assume anyone can hijack anything they want. Inside "the West" you have to be a carrier, a transit provider with a few hundred customers. Which sounds good, until you realize there's over 500 such organizations in North America alone.

Re:Ip's can be hijacked

[antitithenai]

Oh seriously, are we now going the route of "but someone hijacked Google's ip!". There is other evidence in the article, too, and there is absolutely no reason to believe it wasn't really Google doing it. Apart from someone having personal disbelief in Google doing evil things.

Re:Ip's can be hijacked

[hhw]

The majority of transit providers use a BGP prefix list to limit what IP addresses you are permitted to advertise to them either through manual management of the list or by using a routing registry, so it's not nearly as common as you're implying. The exception is when it comes to peering, but there aren't that many networks that do a significant amount of peering. And if any of your peers catch you IP hijacking, they're likely to de-peer pretty quickly if they discover you're hijacking IP's. Yes, there are a few transit providers who don't follow this properly (the few instances I recall of IP hijacking usually revolved around Sprint), but it's false to assume that just anyone with a BGP connection can just hijack anyone's IP address.

Re:Ip's can be hijacked

[OeLeWaPpErKe]

Well google will release a statement, so we'll know a bit more soon.

Re:Can we get a better source?

[MikeBabcock]

To be fair, that's actually way too close to the source for my comfort.

I'm not saying they did, and I'm quite sure they did not, but Mocality could completely make up everything in this story. I'd much prefer a traditional news organization to have done the research on this so I have some third party confirmation rather than trusting the self-declared harmed party.

I believe in cloud-sourcing the news as much as the next guy, but this is when investigative reporting is most valuable. Serious accusations require serious and skilled reporting.

Yuck...

[Anonymous Coward]

Well I work at Google, and generally the FUD I hear around here is just that. This sounds truly awful though.

For what it's worth, I do believe this is a Kenya office problem. Individual offices have a ton of autonomy and a call center will do what they're told. From the central office perspective, (a) they really do believe what they preach, and (b) this is just retarded. In the grand scheme of things, nobody cares about Kenyan business listings except for the top people in the Kenyan office trying to make a name for themselves.

Assuming it really is all true, I hope heads roll, and I hope Google makes amends before the courts makes amends for them.

Re:Yuck...

[Sarten-X]

Shh... rational thought isn't allowed here. This is Slashdot.

Re:Yuck...

[Anonymous Coward]

I second that. I'm at Google, and if this stuff turns out to be real, I expect that people will be terminated. There's no need for that kind of crap: we're doing pretty well by playing the game honestly.

Speaking about fraud

[OeLeWaPpErKe]

Well ... That depends, don't you agree ?

Apparently facebook is ("was") paying people for bad-mouthing google. I am not saying that's necessarily the case here, but it's certainly a datapoint to consider.

Re:Speaking about fraud

[Anonymous Coward]

Sadly, people in the US are so accustomed to the practice of paid badmouthing it's become a non-issue, e.g. the hundreds of millions of dollars that George Soros has been paying through organizations like Move-On and Occupy Wall Street to advance his causes.

Re:Speaking about fraud

[OeLeWaPpErKe]

Well, considering the history of socialism, even inside the united states, you can count yourself lucky that bribing people is all they do.

In Europe, we're not quite so lucky. The city of Brussels was blocked entirely 3 days in a row. They even attacked a police station and several streets look like a war zone ("unrelated vandals" is the party line).

That's just the last month.

Google employees

[alexo]

There are a lot Google employees that read Slashdot.
I strongly encourage those of them that are appalled at the practice to express their disgust to their direct and indirect managers, up to and including the execs.

If the accusations hold then perhaps either

[Anonymous Coward]

some supposedly really smart folks are facing jail time

or

Mocality will get very rich and withdraw.

It seems fair that Mocality should end up owning all the Google Kenya operations with Google as a cooperative partner.

Re:Can we get a better source?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't, and it doesn't add anything new. But the poster asked for some other source than "some blog", so maybe his more happy to read the rehashed article from TC.

Re:That is Google KENYA's responsibility.

[flyingsquid]

Google is responsible for what its employees do, but it's ridiculous to claim that the company must be somehow corrupt and evil because of what a single branch is doing. There's a massive difference between Page and Brin actively ordering their employees to engage in deceitful business practices, and making a poor hiring decision in an obscure outpost of the company in one of the most corrupt countries in the world. It's the difference between actively doing the wrong thing, and failing to prevent it. There are shades of grey to these things and arguing that Google is evil if anyone in the company, anywhere, ever does something evil is just idiotic.

If its real why not pursue legal recourse instead

[Anonymous Coward]

I think it is a crock. Everything they posted could be easily fabricated and if it was real why not pursue legal recourse instead of just blogging about it. I think they are just trying to get extra attention.

Such is the nature of large corporate legal teams

[alexo]

Everything you said is true except the last bit, "this is a huge, huge, blow to Google." Cynically, there is no way some small Kenyan firm is going to be able to bring a serious lawsuit in the US against Google. Google's legal team would crush them, tie them up in series after series of motions, and bankrupt Mocality before any verdict could hope to be passed. Such is the nature of the US legal system.

FTFY.

The whole thing seems a bit off

[phorm]

30,000+ hits, but they suspect it's a group of people and not bots? That seems dubious.
The UA string is completely messed as well.
"The user agent is unusual for Kenya: the stable version of Google Chrome released on 20 September 2011, running on 32-bit Linux. With the exception of this IP, it barely appears in our logs."

User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/535.7 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/16.0.912.63 Safari/535.7

It seems close to safari, but also identifies itself as chrome running on Linux 64-bit...
I've checked my own UA on linux, and a buddy's Safari. The UA string is closer to Safari except that Safari doesn't run on Linux, and Safari wouldn't have the Chrome markings either. This is more than a bit unusual for a UA, it's a mismatched spoof.

My guess is that
a) Somebody has found a way to abuse google search or the search servers to perform queries
or
b) Somebody has managed to infect some devices at google. My first thought along this line would be an infected smartphone

At the moment, the only tie to google seems to be an IP address range with a messed up User Agent and somebody claiming to be a google employee (but also lying about being in partnership with mocality). That's not exactly hard data. If the phone # had been the same google office it might be a bit more (also spoofable with VOIP in about 2 seconds).

If google *was* involved in such a thing I'd gladly throw them under the bus. But I'd not be willing to do so based on the evidence given.

Re:The whole thing seems a bit off

[Anonymous Coward]

This is more than a bit unusual for a UA, it's a mismatched spoof.

For the record, it is a standard Chrome UA. For example, I have:
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/535.7 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/16.0.912.75 Safari/535.7

(I'm not disagreeing with the rest of your post)

Re:Can we get a better source?

[larry bagina]

TechCrunch is The Register without the limey accent. Or, these days, Huffington Post's technology section.

Came through, but not necessarily from

[vovick]

Provided Google has a worldwide VPN, which it almost certainly does, the data packets could originate from its Kenyan or Indian branch, go through VPN to Google CA, leave their private network there and come back to Kenya.

Re:Came through, but not necessarily from

[KhabaLox]

That's an interesting thought. I wonder if any multi-nationals have restricted or change their VPN topology to avoid being subject to some government's data seizure practices.

Kenya Believe It?

[AdamThor]

Where can you find liars?
Google in Kenya!
Google in Kenya, they've got liars!

Re:That is Google KENYA's responsibility.

[Anonymous Coward]

It should be headed by an expendable Vice President with a secret golden parachute. At least, that's how other businesses do it.

Cold calling sales people lie???

[clyde_cadiddlehopper]

Shocked. I am completely shocked.

Re:Can we get a better source?

[Anthony Mouse]

So the source of the information is not some unknown blog with an unknown level of bias, it's the competitor's blog with an obvious and strong bias. That's much better then.

Is Google evil?

[peppepz]

They collect personal information in the same ways as what I would have called "spyware" in the 90s (and the data they collect is more personal, and their coverage is... global); now they're even caught doing MS-like business practices (or worse, as I seem to understand that what they did might even be illegal).

They still have credit to me for all the good they do for open source (summer of code, open protocols, webm, patents, android...), but they're starting to look a bit like the company of Scorpio in that famous Simpsons episode.

Re:Can we get a better source?

[Eunuchswear]

Please try to understand the meaning of the word "source".

Re:That is Google KENYA's responsibility.

[mkuki]

it is not a fucking department. it is a local branch in kenya, then, some branch in india. doing exactly the same things all kenyan and indian businesses do. are you saying that google has instituted a policy for scam-calling business owners to trick them into paying them to have a domain name and a website hosted on google's servers ? does google have a hosting business ?

First, Your statement is bull. I'm Kenyan, and this is not standard operating procedure for Kenyan businesses. It behooves you to do some actual research (or even read the actual article) before spewing crap. Also, even if this was SOP, didn't your parents ask you "If all your friends were jumping off a cliff, would you do it too?". Wrong is wrong, most people know that. Germany was always the laughing stock of Europe because German businesses for the longest time could deduct bribes paid to foreign governments from their taxes. They would have loved your viewpoint. Anyway, with that out of the way, the blog post is pretty detailed. Google really has only 2 options 1: Explain 2: Admit culpability This is a pretty freaking big story in Kenya right now. Google is pretty well known, they've been doing a huge push to win Kenyan businesses to their services, they've invested heavily both in physical infrastructure and capacity, and this is the kind of shennanigans that can really sully a companies reputation, especially when it seems like Goliath vs David and Goliath is playing dirty.

Re:That is Google KENYA's responsibility.

[Anonymous Coward]

Nigeria dumbass. Kenya is legit, yo.

Only in Kenya!

[Culture20]

http://www.weebls-stuff.com/songs/kenya/
Google-Kenya caught misbehaving in Kenya.

Re:Can we get a better source?

[Draconi]

How much closer to the source do you want?

I won't believe it until I get to read it in the original Klingon.

-

Don't you mean the original Mocal?

So let me get this straight...

[Anonymous Coward]

For once, it was the Africans getting scammed and not vice versa?

It is NOT Google

[geekoid]

Google just provide the network.
" The partnership with Safaricom, Equity Bank and Kenic called the Getting Kenyan Businesses Online (GKBO) program,"

http://www.blackweb20.com/2011/09/12/google-getting-kenyan-businesses-online-with-gkbo/#.TxBmUKUS22U

About the story:
"I’d like you to meet Douglas. On this call (first 2 minutes) you can clearly hear Douglas identify himself as Google Kenya employee, s"

Yeah, no one lie about that to make them seem more legit.

"attempt to undermine our business, "
Undermine it for what? There is nothing there to undermine for Google.

"It looks like Google has now outsourced the Getting Kenya Businesses Online operation to India!"
no, it doesn't.

The person claims Google is doing it to sell a services, but as far as I can tell Googles service is free.

http://www.kbo.co.ke/faqs

Why haven' they contacted Google?
Why haven'tr they bothered to do cursory investigation into the company?
Why do the limit there 'research' to just the network?

This smells like some stirring the pot to get into the news.

As a side note, information is online, anyone can get it.

Re:It is NOT Google

[Anonymous Coward]

Good job Sherlock. Google had nothing to do with it. Oh, wait, they admitted and apologized! https://plus.google.com/115264064268941645500/posts .

Re:That is Google KENYA's responsibility.

[flyingsquid]

Engage in racist slander much? Read the article. Kenya is not so corrupt a place. I have close friends who worked for years there (in other business sectors) who confirm that.

Also, is it your view that branch offices of American corporations, if they should find themselves somewhere more corrupt than America, should join in the corruption? That's an odd view. There's specific American law against that, in fact, with strong penalties against a firm's American corporate operation if it can be proven that it enabled or condoned corrupt practices abroad. Whether American law covers the specific varieties of corruption alleged here I can't speak to. But do you really believe that there's nothing wrong with American corporations having foreign branches and subsidiaries engage in corruption?

Transparency International rates Kenya according to their Corruption Perception Index as ranking near the bottom in terms of corruption. The country is ranked 174th out of 182 countries, and scores a 2.2 out of 10. That puts Kenya, at least by this measure, behind Nigeria (143th, 2.4 out of 10) in terms of corruption. It's not racist to call Kenya corrupt, any more than it would be prejudiced to say that America (7.1) is more corrupt than Norway (9.0) it's just a statement of fact.

As far as arguing that American companies should condone foreign corruption, that wasn't my argument. My argument was that it was more likely a poor decision in hiring at the regional level than official policy. If that is the case- and right now, all we have is a single blog to go on, so it's anybody's guess how this happened- it still isn't acceptable, and Google still needs to take action but it's more understandable. So no, if you read my post you'll see that it's not my argument that America should join the corruption, and it's not my argument that it's acceptable that American corporations engage in corruption. So in short, you've completely distorted my argument, and you've ascribed beliefs to me that I don't hold, and you've called me a racist for no reason... this is really, really odd behavior for someone who is claiming to be in favor of honesty and integrity.

Re:That is Google KENYA's responsibility.

[sexconker]

google's india offices have tried to sell them domain name and web hosting. so ?

Look, it's unity100 being a moron again.
RTFA.

Evidence is weak and unverified

[Anonymous Coward]

1. This is all currently unverified

2. The main evidence is that people making fraudulent phone calls containing multiple lies, also claim to work for google. That's fairly weak. Lots of people try to sell products claiming to be from a certain vendor, but they're actually reselling services.

3. The only other evidence is the google IP. This IP is associated with manual scans of websites, so seeing lots of requests from this IP would not be unusual. I'd like to see verification or at least further details of their "sting" operation to ensure that they only sent false flag information to this IP, and didn't send false flag information to other IPs.

4. Even if the link between the fraudulent phone calls and the google IP can be established without question, there's still the possibility that an outsourced call centre abused access to google network services (eg VPN).

5. Note the switch between Kenyan google and Indian google, isn't so surprising, these scams tend to move around. The fact that the Indian stuff picked up right when the Kenyan stuff stops, actually points more to the same call centre. When you move call centres you often have them running side by side for a short period in order to work out any kinks. The graphs in the article, indicate a sudden shift.

No, he doesn't. No such thing a Google GKBO

[geekoid]

No he doesn't. In fact, he has no proof Google is doing this at all.

He has proof someone on Google Keyna's network is going this.

He keeps saying Google GKBO as if GKBO is someone part of Google, It is not.
Google Kenya Provides the Network and some web building services for free. That's their involvement.

http://www.kbo.co.ke/faqs
http://www.blackweb20.com/2011/09/12/google-getting-kenyan-businesses-online-with-gkbo/#.TxBmUKUS22U

"That’s why we’re thrilled to announce today that Google, Safaricom, Equity Bank and KENIC have come together to create Getting Kenyan Businesses Online (GKBO),"
http://google-africa.blogspot.com/2011/09/getting-kenyan-businesses-online.html

It's most likely KENIC people who are doing this.

Re:No, he doesn't. No such thing a Google GKBO

[Kalriath]

Except that Google operates the GXBO programmes, so ultimately it's up to them to make sure that their partners and employees are not stepping out of line and damaging their reputation.

Re:That is Google KENYA's responsibility.

[sexconker]

google wouldnt. but, people employed in google russia, definitely would. bribe or die ? anyone would choose bribe. that does not mean that google ireland is approving it. they end up approving it if they dont take action on it.

Look, it's unity100 being a moron again.
"Google" is a corporation - an entity made up of many people, including its employees. When an employee does something wrong, Google does something wrong.
Something viewed as wrong here doesn't get a pass because it happened somewhere else where that behavior is still wrong but is more common.

Google's burning villages and eating puppies? Well, it's Africa, I guess that's just their culture.

Only on slashdot!

Re:That is Google KENYA's responsibility.

[unity100]

and look ! you are marked with a red dot in my interface.... i wonder why ...

Facts, get them.

[geekoid]

"|does google have a hosting business ?

        Yes, they do. Did you not read the article?"

No they do not. You need to look a little farther the then accuser to get facts.

http://google-africa.blogspot.com/2011/09/getting-kenyan-businesses-online.html
http://www.kbo.co.ke/faqs

"That’s why we’re thrilled to announce today that Google, Safaricom, Equity Bank and KENIC have come together to create Getting Kenyan Businesses Online (GKBO)"
KENIC runs the hosting busins and the operation, Google Kenya provide free access to tehir network and some services.

ooookay

[unity100]

yes. well done ! you have showed everyone how big a moron i was.

now, we are expecting to show the same kind of aptitude when something undesirable is done by any microsoft outfit.

Re:That is Google KENYA's responsibility.

[geekoid]

Yes, Google is well know; which is why this company is stirring the pot to get headlines.

GKBO is not a Google operation. Google simply provides the network.

" huge push to win Kenyan businesses to their services,"
hmm, and a competitor accuses them of something and you take that at face value instead of looking up facts.
The really shows your bias in this matter.

As a side, to dismiss the huge corruption is Keyna is foolish.

Why are you idiots getting modded up?

Google Modus Operandi revealed

[dtjohnson]

It's unlikely that this the first time that Google has done this in Kenya or anywhere else...especially considering that their Indian call centers are apparently involved.

To the conspiracy theorists out there.

[atticus9]

I can believe someone from Google stumbled across a publicly available database and used that as a listing to cold call people, but there's nothing to be gained by claiming to be Mocality's partner (likely this was just a vendor making stuff up on the fly to cover face). The amount of money involved is trivial compared to time spent on other efforts, and I suspect GKBO is more of a goodwill mission than about trying to make money.

I'm sorry Google is competing against Mocality, but Mocality can't just sit on a database and expect to make money indefinitely, it's bad for Kenyans if there isn't competition.

Re:To the conspiracy theorists out there.

[Anonymous Coward]

So it's perfectly OK for you for a company to invest money and resources (which also cost) to build up a business asset, and then Google to abuse it without paying?

If this is true I'd say there is scope for not just a civil lawsuit, there is in principle criminal activity here, theft, misrepresentation, defamation - I'm sure a good lawyer could add quite a bit to that.

The civil aspect you can forget about - Google can use their cash reserves to just starve the operator in court. However, the criminal aspect means state resources, and they don't give up (providing the Kenyan reputation for corruption is no longer valid).

Disappointing, and petty..

Google is in the web authoring business?

[Spazmania]

Since when is Google in the business of building web sites for small businesses?

5 minutes with (ironically) google

[Anonymous Coward]

Competition Act. Section 21: Restrictive Trade Practices. Section 55: False or Misleading Representations (Specifically 55.a.v.) And Section 56 & 57: Unconscionable Conduct. (Probably 56.2.d, and Section 57.1 in general.) And the Trade Descriptions Act. Specifically sections regarding "Prohibition of False Trade Description". And of course the Defamation act, because of the false claims about Mocality's business practices.

And possibly the Witchcraft Act. Because computers, you know.

Re:5 minutes with (ironically) google

[snowgirl]

Competition Act. Section 21: Restrictive Trade Practices. Section 55: False or Misleading Representations (Specifically 55.a.v.) And Section 56 & 57: Unconscionable Conduct. (Probably 56.2.d, and Section 57.1 in general.) And the Trade Descriptions Act. Specifically sections regarding "Prohibition of False Trade Description". And of course the Defamation act, because of the false claims about Mocality's business practices.

And possibly the Witchcraft Act. Because computers, you know.

Thanks. :) I never denied that it wasn't illegal, was just calling on people to avoid speculation.

That's how far MAFIAA propaganda came:

[Anonymous Coward]

People believe that to make a copy of openly available information (A website, a Facebook profile, etc) is evil.

PROTIP: If you don't want others to copy it, DON'T MAKE IT AVAILABLE! Duh! Is that so hard to get?
Writing "Don't copy this" next to it means nothing if the person reading it is not somebody you can trust personally. Which is the case just about... NEVER.
And that is also still true if the "Don't copy this" text is part of a law book. Since it's physically impossible to enforce, without putting a DRM chip into everyone's head so that one can't communicate without your censorship^Wcontrol.

Look, I'm sorry you wasted so much time to collect the data. But if you're living in a fantasy reality or are being stupid, then you got only yourselves to blame. Get this, or please just go and die.

Re:Can we get a better source?

[Anonymous Coward]

but Mocality could completely make up everything in this story.

Then Mocality would open itself up to Defamation (and possibly restraint of trade) actions by Google Kenya. Their claims are quite specific, and include IP addresses, recordings, etc. There are no weasel words. If they invented it, it's fraud on their part.

Latest google response

[gitts]

After that initial statement from Google there's more Got this from http://larrymadowo.co.ke/google-kenya-investigating-mocality-ripoff-claims/ Google’s Nelson Mattos, Vice-President for Product and Engineering, Europe and Emerging Markets just released this statement: ‘We were mortified to learn that a team of people working on a Google project improperly used Mocality’s data and misrepresented our relationship with Mocality to encourage customers to create new websites. We’ve already unreservedly apologised to Mocality. We’re still investigating exactly how this happened, and as soon as we have all the facts, we’ll be taking the appropriate action with the people involved.’

Re:Latest google response

[eionmac]

Why no PUBLIC appology.
Data may be public, but use and misrepresentation is not a 'legal' or moral action of a good corporate company. This is a blur of actual action to say data is 'public'

sexconker ran like a biatch (APK pwned him)

[Anonymous Coward]

http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2603836&cid=38661950

Miss-representation

[Martin Spamer]

If the perpetrators of this are misrepresenting themselves as Mocality, it is unsafe to assume that their representation as Google is truthful.

Re:Can we get a better source?

[Snirt]

If the allegations are confirmed as true, we Kenyans should boycott Google's services if no action is taken. I think we do have local search engines, this for example which should substitute Google WHENEVER possible. Page, Brin, Schmidt.....are all vicariously liable for such grievous mistakes.

Re:That is Google KENYA's responsibility.

[Aighearach]

While I entirely agree with you about what normal procedures are, the rest of your explanation just makes me more concerned at the single-sourcing. It may be that they need to do 3. investigate the accusations to see if they are true.

If it is actually true, google is not going to like that, it is not what their corporate culture teaches. They will have every reason to apologize and make concessions.

74.125.63.33 is a Google IP Addr = Google did this

[Anonymous Coward]

For those of you claiming that the IP address in the Mocality logs doesn't prove this is Google, you're wrong. It pretty much does prove exactly that.

If it is discovered that Mocality is lying / falsifying their logs than sure, Google is innocent of this. Otherwise, all you need to do is examine the ARIN registry info for this 74.125.63.33 IP address to see that the 2nd batch of scrapings (which Mocality says were from Google India) is a legit Google IP address.

http://whois.arin.net/rest/net/NET-74-125-0-0-1/pft
http://whois.arin.net/rest/org/GOGL.html
http://whois.arin.net/rest/org/GOGL/nets
http://whois.arin.net/rest/asn/AS15169/pft

All of the above is official Google address space / orgID / ASNs / etc stuff with ARIN. It isn't fake. That 74.125.63.33 IP is a real Google IP.

It sounds like some /. posters are suggesting that anyone could register IPv4 address space with ARIN as Google. My response to those posters is, if you'd ever requested IPv4 address space from ARIN I don't think you'd suggest that it's trivial to do that. There aren't that many people working at ARIN, and in my experience they're pretty sharp. If I tried to social hack my way into registering address space as Google I would need to do so using one of the ARIN POC handles (http://whois.arin.net/rest/poc/ZG39-ARIN.html ie. arin-contact@google.com) already listed as the admin POCs for Google's Org.

And if all of the above didn't convince you (and you don't happen to have some of Google's IP ranges memorized), try pinging www.google.com like I just did:

ping www.google.com
PING www.l.google.com (74.125.115.106) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from vx-in-f106.1e100.net (74.125.115.106): icmp_seq=0 ttl=43 time=25.7 ms
64 bytes from vx-in-f106.1e100.net (74.125.115.106): icmp_seq=1 ttl=43 time=26.5 ms

Then look that up in ARIN's DB. It's from the same IP block as the IP that was scraping Mocality. So, the people claiming that someone not-Google registered this IP space as Google are also claiming that the posers are serving up www.google.com now?

You could take both of those IP addresses and go to any BGP looking glass on the web and do a BGP lookup on them ("show ip bgp 74.125.63.33" in Cisco IOS). Look at the ASN path for both the google.com web page and the IP Mocality reports - they both point back to the same ASN: 15169.

Instead of saying that Mocality is lying, you're saying that someone totally hacked all of Google's ARIN accounts in order to conduct this grand conspiracy that wasn't perpetrated by Google. This is sounding quite a bit more far fetched than the 2 most likely possibilities which are that either:

#1 Mocality is lying / falsifying logs or
#2 Google did this

And if Google did do this, it wasn't just a person or two, but multiple employees at least 2 separate field offices were working on this during business hours for weeks on end. That suggests that it could have been someone higher up in Google with enough juice to control 2 separate Google offices in 2 different countries who made a decision to begin a coordinated and possibly illegal effort against this Kenyan business.

Re:74.125.63.33 is a Google IP Addr = Google did t

[SpanglerIsAGod]

It's a good thing Google doesn't offer hosting because if they did that could also explain the Google IP showing up on Whois.

Re:Can we get a better source?

[way2trivial]

Unmoderated?
Do you know what that word means?

Should we uphold your "standard" for our president

[Anonymous Coward]

He's part Kenyan.. Does that mean our country really as retarded as it seems?

Re:Can we get a better source?

[msauve]

Unmoderated? Do you know what that word means?

Better than you do, obviously.

It's a rumour posted on a blog.

[theNAM666]

Are you so sure of that? Or does he merely claim he has IP logs, etc. etc.?

This is Kenya, not Nebraska; it might as well be Nigeria. Right now it's status is simply a rumor posted on a blog, nothing more. If proof really emerges, it'll be something else, but experience cautions that such claims are to be taken with a grain of salt.

Re:Outrig...Google has taken some responsibility

[theNAM666]

Update 2 of this article states Google has taken some responsibility:

http://techcrunch.com/2012/01/13/facing-another-pr-disaster-google-accused-of-fraudulently-undermining-a-kenyan-startup/

More details still need to emerge.

Re:That is Google KENYA's responsibility.

[theNAM666]

Oh Lord King David!

Google is a big company. Some little unit out in Kenya decides to go off on its own and pull some crap. Google finds out about it, reins them in (or fires them all). Pretty normal happenings. Or have you ever had to manage disparate units?

Re:Outright ...bullshit

[theNAM666]

>Google has a long history of scraping other websites and then dropping them lower in search in favor of their own sites.
> They have been doing this for ages with hotels, restaurants and similar information.
> They're also trying to do it with flights information [mashable.com]. All of these practices will net Google enemies and most likely antitrust issues.
>But Google doesn't care - they know how important timing is and they will abuse their position whenever they can to get there.
> It's a long term goal and Google has managed to get the position where no one can really touch them even if they misbehave.
> Seriously, they were also found out polluting search engines with paid links [searchengineland.com].
>After that they blame someone else and try to seem like a good guy.
>The most hilarious thing is that most geeks believe them just because they use open source (while ironically their products are all proprietary).

>And note that this isn't just Google's Kenyan office misbehaving.
>They also received calls from Google's Indian call centers engaging in similar practices, so this is a practice accepted from Google's HQ.
>On top of that, EPIC has said they will try to get antitrust investigation [techcrunch.com] into Google's introduction of Google+ into search results.
> People are finally starting to wake up to see how bad Google is and how it abuses other companies.

This is utter crapola.

When Google aggregates information and then their aggregated page appears higher in the search results than a bunch of poorly done mom&pop-ola, because it better matches individuals' needs, that's not manipulation of results, that's good service.

Your searchengineland example is poor. Some subcontractor purchased sponsor trash, and when it was discovered, Google killed it. Big deal. The rest of your links are similar FUD. Google Kenya contracts with a Google India call center, and you think corporate headquarters knew about it? C'mon.

Re:That is Google KENYA's responsibility.

[Kalriath]

Also, BP did nothing wrong in the Gulf of Mexico. It was BP AMERICA that caused billions of dollars in damages and ruined the gulf for decades to come! And Microsoft did nothing wrong in the 90s antitrust trials, it was the WINDOWS division that did it!

Re:That is Google KENYA's responsibility.

[Kalriath]

Google runs the same operation in other countries as well. Based on the fact that all the "Get <Country> Online" campaigns have only Google as a common factor, I'd say they are driving it. See:

1. India Get Online
2. Getting Irish Business Online
3. Getting British Business Online
4. Getting Aussie Business Online
5. Canada Get Your Business Online
6. Texas Get Your Business Online
7. Get Nigerian Business Online (Isn't the problem with the internet that Nigerian "business" is already online?)

There's hundreds of other "Get * Online" that Google is running, so claiming that it's not a Google operation is flat out incorrect. Also, the Wall Street Journal reports that Google has already issued a statement and apology, so clearly they accept responsibility for the issue whether they or contractors authorised to act on their behalf were responsible.

Being a *sshole

[Anonymous Coward]

OK I am going to be that guy everybody hates:

Al though we are all aware that Google is not what it used to be or at least what it pretended to be, the title should "Google KENYA..." You cannot expect a totally standard way of behaving in a huge corporation no matter how much you try to encourage and enforce it. Ethics and good business practices are going to be the ones chosen by the local offices. Soure you can fire them to make an example of it but cannot prevent it. You cannot expect the same ethical conduct from the main offices, the ones in North America or Western Europe than the ones in Africa, Russia, etc. That would be a perfect world and we are far far away from that.

Evil Google strikes again: OpenStreetMap

[Anonymous Coward]

From the same Google India IP range comes a vandalism attack on OpenStreetMap, the open-data alternative to Googlemaps:

The bogus changes range from the obvious adding or deleting of nodes to the map or posting junk labels on locations, to the subtle but dangerous – such as reversing traffic flow on one way streets. Two accounts have been noted modifying maps in London and New York, and have been making more obvious changes since last Thursday 12 January. OpenStreetMap has yet to do a full analysis of activity from the IP range which amounts to 102,000 hits using 17 accounts over the last year.

OpenStreetMap claims map vandalism traced to Google IP range
OpenStreetMap blog posting
Troubling Google Contractor Allegedly Caught Vandalizing Open Street Map