Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Subpoenaed Over Data Privacy, Antitrust in Missouri (cnbc.com)

Posted by msmash on from the closer-look dept.

Google is facing a new front in its regulatory battles after Missouri's attorney general on Monday launched a broad investigation into whether the company's business practices violate the state's consumer-protection and antitrust laws. From a report: Attorney General Josh Hawley's office said on Monday that it issued a subpoena to investigate if Google's use of information that it collects about consumers is appropriate and if the company stifles competing websites in search results. Google has largely steered clear of antitrust problems in the U.S. That's not the case in Europe, where the company faces a fine of about $2.7 billion over the display of its shopping ads.

18 comments

  1. About time by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

    Google and their ilk are data collectors and trackers. They are not your friend. Go Missouri!

    1. Re:About time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "This is really all [the Republicans] fault. If you ask me with this too big to fail crap."

      FTFY

      At the time this was going on I got a mailing from the GOP bragging about while Obama was partying in Hollywood with his friends, McCaine was doing the hard work of giving billions to bailout his corporate buddies.

    2. Re:About time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "We're both dumbfuck faggots."

      Fixed that for the both of you.

      Now bend over and open up. It doesn't matter which side you want the elephant's dick in, you're getting the ass in the other.

    3. Re: About time by megamind · · Score: 1

      Missouri must want all of us to live in misery by wasting their fucking time.

  2. Oh Missouri, the one state that can't do it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously, nobody even believes Missouri has a complaint, they're just making trouble because Google pointed out that the Gateway Arch is legally supposed to be in Illinois.

  3. There is only one rule for the internet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    *User beware!*

    Google is within its rights to collect whatever it wants from traffic going through its servers. And there is no way for anyone to verify what it is collecting. You want to block them out of your machine fine. Let the rest of us decide for ourselves. Nobody is required to use Google. Therefore it has no monopoly.

    1. Re:There is only one rule for the internet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Not required to use Google? Try again - Google and its ad tracking network are literally everywhere, tracking you no matter whether you directly use a Google website or not.

    2. Re:There is only one rule for the internet by Okind · · Score: 1

      Google is within its rights to collect whatever it wants from traffic going through its servers.

      No, it's not. This is why, for example, the EU has privacy laws and is tightening them (the GDPR will come into effect next May).

      Nobody is required to use Google. Therefore it has no monopoly.

      Sadly, this is not true. By using (for example) Google Analytics, it's the website owner chat chooses my information to be collected, not I. I have no choice in this. At most, I can try to find websites that don't track me, but these are increasingly rare these days and not a viable choice.

      This lack of choice for information subjects is the reason that privacy laws exist: the people choosing for the privacy violations are not the people whose privacy is violated.

    3. Re:There is only one rule for the internet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what? You can block their trackers. Or you can spend your life in a cave...

    4. Re:There is only one rule for the internet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes you can install blockers, but I doubt Google would use that as a defense in this lawsuit.

  4. How much you wanna bet ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    ... that the Missouri Attorney General received a large campaign contribution from Microsoft?

    1. Re:How much you wanna bet ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or maybe the legacy media companies?

    2. Re:How much you wanna bet ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably. They tried Mississippi last time.

  5. "Give us the information..." by tlambert · · Score: 1

    "Give us the information, so we can see if you are sharing the information with anyone!"

    Uh... yeah... we realize Missouri is "The Show Me State" and all, but if we gave you the information, then it would mean that, yes, we shared information with someone: "Those Guys In Missouri".

  6. THIS stops THAT, natively & efficiently by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-7 32/64-bit https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=%22APK+Hosts+File+Engine%22+and+%22start64%22&btnG=Google+Search&gbv=1/

    Ads/script/malware rob speed/security/privacy/bandwidth.

    Hosts add speed (via hardcodes/adblocks), security (vs. bad sites/malware/poisoned dns), reliability (vs. dns down), & anonymity (vs. dns requestlogs/trackers).

    Less power/cpu/ram + IO use vs. DNS/routers/addons/antivirus + less security bugs/complexity & faster vs. addons/routers/remote dns!

    Avoids DNSChangers in routers/IP settings & dns redirect (99++% of ISP DNS != patched vs. it) + DNS tracking & lighten DNS load & resolve faster from local RAM!

    * Via what u NATIVELY have in a FASTER kernelmode IP stack!

    APK

    P.S. - Safe https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/e01211ca36aa02e923f20adee0a3c4f5d5187dc65bdf1c997b3da3c2b0745425/analysis/1433430542/ (self checking code vs. infection of it built-in)