Slashdot Mirror
Google Gets Consumer Service Ultimatum From German Consumer Groups
An anonymous reader writes "Google received an ultimatum Thursday from German consumer organizations that want it to start answering questions from its users via email. The Federation of German Consumer Organizations (VZBV) has asked Google to sign an undertaking that it will provide customer service by responding individually to users questions sent by email, said Carola Elbrecht, VZBV's project manager for consumer rights in the digital world at the VZBV. Signing such a document would expose Google to fines if it breached the undertaking. On the other hand, said Elbrecht, 'If Google does not sign it, we're going to court.'"
That doesn't sound entirely unreasonable. If it pushes Google to have a bit more of a responsive front end to their customers, then... I'm ok with that. Though I'd also see Google's side of it if they insisted on a GMail/G+ account to prove they are a valid customer and not MS spam bots!
Waiting for an amusing sig.
Quite right - I'm very reluctant to make more use of Google's services than I do because I know that it is practically impossible to get a response from the company if anything goes wrong. They may assume that their market share is big enough without being seen as a responsive company, but I think that in the long run they are wrong to behave this way.
They're demanding a level of service for something they're getting for free? Really?
Downside to that is the law applies to all German companies, not just business who publish under .de domains. .XX then you have to deal with the laws that cover .XX's users even if they are not paying for it as a .XX user.
Additionally it is about Consumers, so one could say you register in the US, but the company has a presence and users in
It's far from free. You simply pay with your personal information instead of your wallet.
Well apparently the law in Germany says you can't provide a service without having a method for customers to contact the provider directly. And why not? Why would it be so strange to be able to call Google up with a question or send them an e-mail and get a response?
Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
UK law also has a similar provision in the UK's E-Commerce Regulations (scroll down to Minimum information to be provided). Google does not comply, I talked to a Google employee who told me, something like, that it was not convenient/efficient and that I should use a web form.
I don't like putting questions via web form since I don't get to keep a copy as I do when I send email.
Well apparently the law in Germany says you can't provide a service without having a method for customers to contact the provider directly.
But does the law require the use of any specific technological method? (It would seem pretty dumb if that was the case, as technologies do change.) Would a variation on an online forum where users can elect to not have their questions be public and where there is someone (or several people) dedicated to answering the questions be an acceptable solution? After all, for virtually anything where you are dealing with Google at all, you'd be online and so able to use a web forum.
"Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
The annoying entitled freeloaders are simply asking for what they are entitled to under local laws.
If Google (or anyone else) doesn't like it they're free to stop doing business in that locality; it is their choice to weigh up the benefits and costs of operating there but if they do choose to do so then they must abide by local laws.
Are you saying to take into account the costs is not a valid thought process?
I suspect that a company as big and successful as Google is well aware of the costs of doing business and, as they are continuing to operate there, have assessed them as being worth bearing.
In a nutshell, if you work in country X you must obey the laws there - no matter how big or self important you see yourself; the cultural imperialism of your home country's attitudes to laws and business are quite frankly irrelevant. If I set up a business in the US deliberately flouting the laws (e.g. selling Cuban cigars) I'd expect to get some trouble from the law, even if my main offices were located in a separate country.
For quite a long time, Google Groups would let you add people to a group, then set the group to private, making it impossible to view the group or file a complaint, but Google ignored email complaints, claiming they had a web form. They still have absolutely no mechanism for reporting spam sent by their customers who aren't using a gmail address to send the spam. And they just don't care.
They have either given up entirely on "don't be evil", or not thought through the implications of being extremely large and very careless.
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
Sue them for breaking german law
This begs a question ...
Can local laws dictate what Internet must do ?
What if country X has a law which states that *All information passing through our country must carry the slogal "THE QUEEN OF COUNTRY Y IS A BITCH"*, then what?
Should all the emails, PDF and whatnots that somehow pass through that country X have to carry that silly and provocative slogan??
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Lest you forget Google is incorporated in almost every European country you can name.
Google Germany GmbH
ABC-Str. 19
20354 Hamburg
Deutschland
Telefon: +49 40-80-81-79-000
Fax: +49 40-4921-9194
Google München
Google Germany GmbH
Dienerstraße 12
80331 München
Deutschland
Its possible that competitors will create tens of thousands of queries just to ensure that Google cannot meat the deadlines. A bit like when Microsoft was the top submitter of takedown notices to google but didn't remove the same content from bing.
Fine, then why should I not just go pirate the latest [insert name of big US recording star here] if I am only violating US law and I am not a US citizen ?
That's not a great argument because there are international copyright laws. You'd wouldn't breaking US law, you'd be breaking your local law.
I have bad news for you: There are laws in Germany that govern what data about customers a company may collect and that and how it has to answer questions of its customers about stored data.
And unlike in the US, a company can not force the customer to give up his rights by means of a TOS.
The law stipulates that certain rights can not be taken away by contract.
These laws are meant to remove some of the inequality that we have between big companies with well paid lawyers and a customer with less knowledge about the law and less time and money to spend i court to get his rights.
Well if you can't tax them directly because they are tax dodging companies, how else are they going to make the companies play fair?
This law does not "protect" anyone. BTW we have strong consumer laws, but they actually protect people, not just try to annoy corporations.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
If you provide a webservice - especially a commercial one - you are required to prominently display valid identity and contact information, including ways that provide quick and immediate ways to communicate with you (the laws especially mentions/requires "electronic post" ).
The background of that German law isn't really about forcing companies to provide customer service (besides making it clear who your business partner is - you have to be able to get hold of whoever is behind a website in case you pay them and they don't deliver).
You have to think about it more in terms of DMCA/cease&desist/law enforcement and it might make more sense to Americans:
"Oh, that DMCA complaint about some user using our service to provide a Super Bowl livestream? That went to our post box on the Bahamas. Three weeks later when it arrived at the main office and out internal mail processing had delivered it to our tech department, they immediately took down the stream."