Slashdot Mirror
Google's Scanning of Gmail To Deliver Ads May Violate Federal Wiretap Laws
New submitter SpacemanukBEJY.53u writes "In a declaration that could make Google very nervous, a U.S. federal judge on Thursday rebuffed Google's defense of its targeted ad system that scans the content of Gmail. Judge Lucy Koh — who also heard the Apple-Samsung case — found Google's terms and conditions and privacy policy isn't clear to users. Koh subsequently allowed a class-action suit to proceed against the company (official ruling). The plaintiffs in the suit allege Google violates federal and state wiretap laws by scannning the messages sent by non-Gmail and Gmail users."
Will this shit die already, this is getting tiring.
It is an automatic system.
I bet Microsoft is funding this, AGAIN.
...she was(is?) the ringmaster for the Apple Samsung patent battle.
Personally if I wanted a decent tech judgement I'd move heaven and earth to end up before Judge Alsup (Oracle v Android)
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
Somehow I doubt "federal wiretapping laws" take into account how much the person being tapped does or does not enjoy the results.
THL phish sticks
The same scrutiny would get applied to NSA's escapades but they get a free ride on everything.
Virus scanning is a service a provider can deliver to its customers.
Scanning mails for the benefit of the provider for advertising is not beneficial to the customer.
...except in so far as it allows the service provider to make a profit thereby enabling the customer to get access to the service for free.
I wish I were as sure of anything as some people are of everything
Yes, you and I are not allowed to listen in and record the feds.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
If the court decides that mail providers cannot, on principle, be allowed to scan the content of a mail message then I don't see why it wouldn't affect content based spam filtering.
This case could have interesting ramifications for all mail providers if the court decides this violates wire-tap laws.
Paul Leader
NSA doesn't tap wires. They tap fibre.
Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
>The plaintiffs in the suit allege Google violates federal and state wiretap laws by scannning the messages sent by non-Gmail and Gmail users."
The ECPA says that email is different and that only watching the live transmission outside the normal checking of function of the email system by a person when not otherwise disclaimed by the privacy policy is the equivalent of a wiretap.
That's because email is a store and forward communication, not the equivalent of a phone call.
When the ECPA was written, it had to be written in a way that prevented turning all operators into felons when they weren't deliberately spying on their users. This is the "hole" (it's not really) that Google is using to justify the machine reading of email, if it's spelled out.
I have read the Gmail privacy statement. To me it covers their ass in this regard. The Gmail privacy statement applies just as much to incoming mail as it does to outgoing. But even if it doesn't, when you send email, unless it's encrypted, it's the equivalent of a postcard. Are we going to be throwing meatspace postal workers into jail when they read the text next to the address on a postcard? That would be insane and unrealistic expectation of privacy, wouldn't it? That's not just my opinion, it's the opinion of everyone who knows anything about email. It's not a new concept, either. It's been expressed in books like my copy of the first edition of "Navigating The Internet" where the author introduced this "new thing" called the "web."
Calling this wiretapping and removing the safe-harbor sets a dangerous precedent and will turn all operators into felons.
While there is the desire to have complete privacy when it comes to email, unencrypted transmission and text negate any realistic expectation of privacy. Privacy starts with the user and ends with the user. If you don't want people reading your stuff (besides the fuckin' NSA spit), take measures to keep them from reading it. Instead of sending plain text on the postcard, encrypt the text with your (figurative) Ovaltine Decoder Ring and get your friends to use their decoder rings.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdA__2tKoIU
There is a crying need for transparent encryption methods in communication software, and it boggles my mind that this hasn't happened yet.
--
BMO - Drink more Ovaltine.
Actually, many spam filters do. They're not just blind pattern matchers, they do have algorithms that continue to tune the filters' effectiveness, even without human intervention. They may also download other databases from their home (like Barracudacentral), but that's so that your spam filter can take advantage of the tuning that the other thousands of other spam filters are assembling as well (which might get your filter one jump ahead of a spam blast as a filter in Chicago has already seen the blast, but it hasn't reached Seattle yet...).
No, but the person you're sending the e-mail to has. When you send physical mail to someone, you don't know if they've got a secretary opening and reading all their mail for them. They could even have an outside company doing it (what, you think Hollywood stars and politicians read and answer their own fan or constituent mail?). And the law has absolutely no problem with this, nor with the idea that if this will be a problem for you as the sender then it's your responsibility to sort this out with the recipient before sending your mail.