Google's resistant
stance in the face of a government subpoena is admirable, though I suspect much of Google's attitude is about
maintaining public trust. The government is not asking for personally identifying information, and that's probably why
Microsoft, AOL, and Yahoo! complied so readily with its info-gathering mandate. At stake is an online pornography act
that has been refuted once by the Supreme Court. The Bush administration is building its case based partly on analysis
of amassed search-query data. Google collects this data; there is no hiding that fact which has made some critics
nervous from the start. In light of the persistent edginess of privacy alarmists, I imagine Google does not want
headlines blaring that the company capitulated by turning over information (anonymous or not) about user queries.
SEW is running an excellent roundup of the case
and its documents.
Google, PR, and the Big Subpoena
Reader Comments
(Page 1)3. I fully agree.
As long as it is not child porn !
Posted at 7:21AM on Oct 20th 2007 by SEO DOG
4. The stake is not porn. DOJ uses the subject for political and PR purposes. There is a library of legal cases regarding to government's pursuit against pornography (or the definition of obscenity). These recurring lawsuits have been going on since 70s. The broad-reaching subpoena diverged from government's previous pattern of actions. Furthermore, if the stake is child protection, a random sample of end user searches is a much better/cheaper measure (more correlated to Government's "stated if not manufactured" objectives).
The stake is the data, "aggregated data" to be precise. That set contains redundant information that with the right mechanism can be extracted. I'm outrageous by how easily AOL, MSN, and Yahoo turned over theirs without any resistance.
"Principles only mean something when you stick to them when it's inconvenient."
I applaud Google's action to fight this just cause.
Posted at 3:50AM on Jan 21st 2006 by Javaflash
5. Let's not forget...
Google is not even a party of the litigation.
Posted at 4:24AM on Jan 21st 2006 by Javaflash
6. I am glad Google is not bending over to assist the Government. Why should it? If they give them what they want today, what will they ask for tomorrow? And the day after?
Google's stand may be the only thing standing between our privacy to search for what we like [whether personal, academic or simply because something was in the "normal" press], and the snoops of the Government and McCarthyism.
Posted at 6:36AM on Jan 21st 2006 by james
7. This request by the DOJ is ludicrous. This is nothing more than another baby step in the erosion of our society and the freedom we all share. I am glad that Google is not giving in to the DOJ. Yes, I look at porn, yes I look at anti-Bush websites, I have visited pages looking for information about chemical weapons, bomb making, nuclear bombs, Al-Queada, Osama, websites to impeach Bush..... but never at child pornography. Somehow I don't think that would matter if the DOJ saw what I HAD been looking at. Oh, and my wife is Arab......
Posted at 11:46AM on Jan 21st 2006 by Joseph Wilson
8. Sir,
The United States of America is founded on the idea
of innovations. Let that be new avenue of law, new market of exchange, new discovery of technology, or new sense of spirituality, we are founded on the idea that we can invent, we can construct, we can evolve.
We're not founded on the idea of destruction, fear,
restriction, accusation, and hate because we have the courage to tolerate, to understand, and to stand by our principals.
The essence of this courage, and this drive to innovate is what make America, who we are today, a proud, strong nation that's an envy of all civilizations.
Posted at 3:51PM on Jan 21st 2006 by Javaflash
9. I am horrified at the lengths to which the Bush Administration will go to invade the privacy of individuals. The Bush Administration proves once again that it does not want a democracy, but rather an oligarchic, fascist state.
I applaud Google’s stance. Even if part of Google’s motivation is related to their public image, they are still standing up against tyrannical behavior when no other major search engine is! (And perhaps Google’s founders are standing up on principle guys!)
It is a shame that Google’s stock prices dropped on Friday. In my opinion, they should have surged higher to show support for a brave move. If you can’t vote with your stock portfolio, vote with your internet behavior. Boycott all other search engines, and stick with Google! (It’s the best one anyways!)
Posted at 1:49AM on Jan 22nd 2006 by Amber Kelly
10. So its good that Google resists the US govt. on providing non personal information, but its OK that Google sees fit to censor results at the request of China?
My guess is that Google doesn't want to give up the information because the public will see how high a percentage of search and web pages involve porn/gambling/illegal activities.
How many corporate users will think twice about search advertising if it becomes well known that the 3 G's (gambling, games, girls) make up the majority of internet usage?
Posted at 9:02PM on Jan 24th 2006 by Responsible Thinking
11. Google is trying to increase their business by keeping their users information safe. Doesn't sound like a bad plan. Google.cn is an attempt to increase business. Still doesn't sound like a bad plan. Already MSN and Yahoo have both given search data to the US gub'mnt and have both turned in Chineese people critical of the Chineese gub'mnt. Their business strategy doesn't seem so hot to me. On a side note, you can bypass most of the google.cn filters by misspelling words. Even using the wrong capital letters works. Due know evel.
Posted at 6:31PM on Jan 31st 2006 by jammit timmaj
Add your comments
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.
1. Bush can stick it as far as i am concerned. I want my p_rn when i like.
Posted at 5:51PM on Feb 14th 2006 by Gratis