Slashdot Mirror
Google Privacy Policy Could Violate EU Law
judgecorp writes "Google's new unified privacy policy could violate EU law, according to objections. The French data regulator warns that the policy will infringe users' privacy by building a single online profile. Commission Nationale de L’informatique et Des Libertes (CNIL) has expressed “deep concerns” about the policy and its adherence to the European Data Protection Directive."
Hasn't MS done the same with MSN passport, where you use one login for Hotmail, MSN Messenger, XBox Live and various other services?
They act like Google doesn't already know everything about everyone. I see nothing wrong with Google doing whatever they want with the information I voluntarily provide them in exchange for their services. If you don't want them to have it, use another service.
and Facebook is not? What is it that Facebook is doing that Google has not done? Reading the FA didn't reveal anything other than an impression that "will continue their investigations with Google’s representatives" essentially means "will see if this gives us a good chance to treat Google as an ATM".
To be honest, having different terms and conditions for every service that Google runs must have been quite confusing for a lot of people*, so consolidating them into one package does make sense.
I can however understand the problem with Google now being able to use data collected from one service and now using it in another, but if all they're doing is using it to target us with more specific ads then I don't really care.
* I've never read the T's and C's and to be honest I reckon only a very small number of Google users have.
Summation 2
Ok, I don't have time to read the new and older policies. Anybody interested in summarizing what changed and its implications?
Check out my cross-platform apps
The problem is that consolidating all data Google knows about someone into a single file *might* break EU laws about privacy and about creating and maintaining files with informations about people.
Of course having the same policy for all services is a nice thing. ...).
But we have anti-Big-Brother laws here in EU, and where US law can tell if yes or no the government (and/or corporations) can or cannot put GPS devices into your car, the EU law also tell if it can keep the data collected by the GPS(and for how long, and who has acces to, and if it can be linked to personnal data,
Given that the EU has been making noises about some grand anti-terrorist/anti-pedophile/gets-the-monster-under-your-bed 'data retention directive' for some time now, they could make this small problem go away by simply agreeing to Google's new 'privacy' policy and then purchasing their little panopticon direct from the source rather than bothering with all that messy legislation.
Efficiency! Progress!
If the services had started out integrated this would not be an issue. On Facebook you can do a search, look at someone's photos, post comments etc. and everyone knows they all share data. Should Google be treated differently just because google brought in picassa, added blogging, etc. rather than implementing them all in one go?
Listen guys, privacy is toast anyway... if anything Google is making us acknowledge this and move along.
Mi domando chi à il mandante di tutte le cazzate che faccio - Altan
It's one thing to have a uniform set of conditions for a number of different services -- and potentially a good thing, if the conditions are fair and well-designed.
It's quite a different question whether that should also be associated with data aggregation or consolidation . Is this actually some kind of attempted cover for data aggregation, to distract attention from simultaneous data aggregation in the hope of reducing or de-fusing objections to an unpalatable plan? After all, there's no real need for uniform conditions to be associated with data aggregation at all.
-wb-
No doubt, that there will be negotiations for the Protect Our Privacy in Europe Law (POPEL) behind everyones backs and rogue states such as former colonies bullied into ratifying them...
Oh, the beautiful gloss of greality!
Google's motto is 'do no evil' which is laudable. It has to be asked though, "who defines what is evil?".
You may think me a tired, old, cynic. I'd have to disagree about the tired bit.
Google violates human decency.
Google DOES allow everyone to opt out of everything, if you want you can most of their services nearly anonymous.
Try that with Facebook.
Having worked for many years in digital security in Europe, I believe that I have some understanding of this issue. It all boils down to the presence (US) or absence (EU) of private credit rating and consumer data collection industries. In Europe, banks are required to do their own risk assessment. If any data collected about a consumer falls in the wrong hands, the collecting party is liable for any damages UNLESS the consumer has given formal (i.e. written) consent for that information to be passed on. In the US, the entire credit industry is predicated on the ability to collect large amounts of data about consumers and then to create risk profiles based on that data.
The problem with trying to use another service is that pretty much everyone does the same thing to different degrees. What if I where a hypothetical social network bloke who was willing to pay actual money to avoid that ads and info selling. I know Slashdot has such an offer. But what about Google, or Facebook. If I, as Joe Facebook, was to put my money where my mouth is, where would I even go to pay. How much would it cost per month, $5, $10, $50? How many people like that would it take to make it worthwhile?
"Google Privacy" is an oxymoron.
a: They collect a LOT of information: not just search, but effectively every web page you visit which includes an add from Doubleclick or +1 or youtube video, plus all the google services: gmail, calendar, docs, are all open season. Not only can Google data-mine your email to show adds on Gmail, but can datamine your email for whatever purpose they want!
b: The privacy policy is amazingly broad. Basically its "We can do anything we want other than sell the raw data to others", and it covers everything they can collect.
c: It covers even services you pay for ! It not only says "we can datamine your email, the documents you create on google docs, etc, to profile you", but I have a paid by the University outsourced-to-Gmail account which, on the bottom of the page, clearly states that it is under the Google "you have no" privacy policy!?!?!
So, by accessing my work email, that is paid for, Google gets to track everything I do, INCLUDING my work email! I guess the only thing paying Google gets you is admin access for the university and no-adds-showing in the email page.
Test your net with Netalyzr
Germany has credit reporting agencies just like the US, for example SCHUFA. (Where do you people come up with this kind of nonsense?)
In both the US and Germany, private financial data is only handed out to third parties with our consent. And in both countries, you basically have to give that consent if you want to have any kind of economic existence at all.
Then we can see what happens. :)
As far as I know, Google is a single company. That it offers "mail", "calendar", "youtube" and other services doesn't mean it is different companies.
Can EU customers of department stores insist that the department not combine information from their shopping at the furniture department and clothing department but treat it separately? If that's what you want you should simply get several loyalty cards and use them separately -- which Google already supports.
In fact, if you don't want to be tracked by Google then simply don't sign in to a google account when you search. Alternatively, have several google accounts -- one for each service.
Just block itself from the EU and tell them to go fuck themselves.
Which is subtly different. But, I wish people would get this right.
For those who have concerns about the new Google policy, it could be a good idea to try the alternatives to the Google services.
For searching purposes, DuckDuckGo provides a very good search engine, that does not attempt to track its users:
https://duckduckgo.com/
Here is some more information why it could be a good idea to use DuckDuckGo instead of Google serach:
http://donttrack.us/
http://dontbubble.us/
Going by these ridiculous stories, we shouldn't use google, or microsoft, or apple, or ?????? .. . . .
Apple constantly log and track all information as previously reported and proven. Scare yourself and do a netwok sniff on your iphone or ipad. Now that extent has risen with the arrival of SIRI and their online services. All stored safely on Apple servers, for apple to use.
Microsoft log everything from you ip to your product id as well as the normal range for their online services.
Google log similar.
The phone companies log every phone call and message sent from every phone on the system.
The government and isps in many countries log every ip address and site visited as well as restrict access to what THEY believe is inappropriate.
The credit card companies and banks track all purchases, and transactions that a person does electronically.
Paypal and similar log every transaction detail a customer does.
Facebook has free access to all you personal information and can do with it what they will. (As per their EULA) and openly claim they own the data people post.
Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc.
At the end of the day, who cares!
People are fooling themselves if they think that their every move and particularly online presence isn't monitored, restricted, filtered and logged.
If its a concern to you, then don't use the service.
The EU laws seem more to appease the hype, than tackle the problems. Lets get into the news again!
One thing I will give google is at least they are not hiding the fact of the data they collect, not like some fruity and monolith companies that hide behind lies and legal loopholes
EU agencies say Google breaking law: commissioner
> [Google] ]We've included the key parts from more than 60 product-specific notices into our main Google Privacy Policy -- so there's no longer any need to be your own mini search engine if you want to work out what's going on."
> Reding argued most users were unaware of what they were signing up to when they used mainstream Internet services.
> "Seventy percent of users rarely, or never, use terms and conditions which very often are written in small print, very complicated, not understandable for the normal user, and users are worried,"
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/01/us-google-privacy-eu-idUSTRE82011K20120301?feedType=RSS&feedName=technologyNews&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+reuters/technologyNews+(News+/+US+/+Technology)&utm_content=Google+International
Does Reding believe that most people fully read, and understand, the 69 page iTunes agreement? Or Microsoft EULA? If not, then why is Google held to a different standard?
Which, in turn, is tied to all things Microsoft?