Author Topic: Feds after Google data  (Read 2720 times)

RadioFreeSeaLab

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,200
Feds after Google data
« on: January 19, 2006, 07:54:41 AM »
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/13657303.htm

Quote
Feds after Google data
RECORDS SOUGHT IN U.S. QUEST TO REVIVE PORN LAW
By Howard Mintz
Mercury News

The Bush administration on Wednesday asked a federal judge to order Google to turn over a broad range of material from its closely guarded databases.

The move is part of a government effort to revive an Internet child protection law struck down two years ago by the U.S. Supreme Court. The law was meant to punish online pornography sites that make their content accessible to minors. The government contends it needs the Google data to determine how often pornography shows up in online searches.

In court papers filed in U.S. District Court in San Jose, Justice Department lawyers revealed that Google has refused to comply with a subpoena issued last year for the records, which include a request for 1 million random Web addresses and records of all Google searches from any one-week period.

The Mountain View-based search and advertising giant opposes releasing the information on a variety of grounds, saying it would violate the privacy rights of its users and reveal company trade secrets, according to court documents.

Nicole Wong, an associate general counsel for Google, said the company will fight the government's effort ``vigorously.''

``Google is not a party to this lawsuit, and the demand for the information is overreaching,'' Wong said.

The case worries privacy advocates, given the vast amount of information Google and other search engines know about their users.

``This is exactly the kind of case that privacy advocates have long feared,'' said Ray Everett-Church, a South Bay privacy consultant. ``The idea that these massive databases are being thrown open to anyone with a court document is the worst-case scenario. If they lose this fight, consumers will think twice about letting Google deep into their lives.''

Everett-Church, who has consulted with Internet companies facing subpoenas, said Google could argue that releasing the information causes undue harm to its users' privacy.

``The government can't even claim that it's for national security,'' Everett-Church said. ``They're just using it to get the search engines to do their research for them in a way that compromises the civil liberties of other people.''

The government argues that it needs the information as it prepares to once again defend the constitutionality of the Child Online Protection Act in a federal court in Pennsylvania. The law was struck down in 2004 because it was too broad and could prevent adults from accessing legal porn sites.

However, the Supreme Court invited the government to either come up with a less drastic version of the law or go to trial to prove that the statute does not violate the First Amendment and is the only viable way to combat child porn.

As a result, government lawyers said in court papers they are developing a defense of the 1998 law based on the argument that it is far more effective than software filters in protecting children from porn. To back that claim, the government has subpoenaed search engines to develop a factual record of how often Web users encounter online porn and how Web searches turn up material they say is ``harmful to minors.''

The government indicated that other, unspecified search engines have agreed to release the information, but not Google.

``The production of those materials would be of significant assistance to the government's preparation of its defense of the constitutionality of this important statute,'' government lawyers wrote, noting that Google is the largest search engine.

Google has the largest share of U.S. Web searches with 46 percent, according to November 2005 figures from Nielsen//NetRatings. Yahoo is second with 23 percent, and MSN third with 11 percent.
Mercury News Staff Writer Michael Bazeley contributed to this report. Contact Howard Mintz at hmintz@mercurynews.com or (408) 286-0236.

TarpleyG

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,001
Feds after Google data
« Reply #1 on: January 19, 2006, 08:42:29 AM »
"For the children" again...  Where do we draw the line?  When will parents be held accountable for their kid's actions?

Greg

mfree

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,637
Feds after Google data
« Reply #2 on: January 19, 2006, 09:18:31 AM »
Google should do the nice thing and print off (on recycled paper) detailed search records for one day in question.

The 10-15 packed trailers can be parked in front of FBI headquarters...

charby

  • Necromancer
  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29,295
  • APS's Resident Sikh/Muslim
Feds after Google data
« Reply #3 on: January 19, 2006, 09:59:09 AM »
well crap I better take down those naked photos my ex..
Iowa- 88% more livable that the rest of the US

Uranus is a gas giant.

Team 444: Member# 536

RadioFreeSeaLab

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,200
Feds after Google data
« Reply #4 on: January 19, 2006, 10:13:52 AM »
Quote from: charby
well crap I better take down those naked photos my ex..
Link? Cheesy

K Frame

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 44,727
  • I Am Inimical
Feds after Google data
« Reply #5 on: January 19, 2006, 10:22:13 AM »
It sounds very much like the gov't request is nothing but another damned fishing expedition.

If that's the case, they should NOT get the data.
Carbon Monoxide, sucking the life out of idiots, 'tards, and fools since man tamed fire.

RadioFreeSeaLab

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,200
Feds after Google data
« Reply #6 on: January 19, 2006, 10:24:22 AM »
That's exactly what it is.

charby

  • Necromancer
  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29,295
  • APS's Resident Sikh/Muslim
Feds after Google data
« Reply #7 on: January 19, 2006, 10:29:07 AM »
Quote from: dasmi
Quote from: charby
well crap I better take down those naked photos my ex..
Link? Cheesy
Link has been removed.. I'm not going to jail because some child might see my ex naked..

I hope you know I was joking about naked pictures of my ex, but I can mail you a glossy or matte finish for a nice price. Smiley

Charby
Iowa- 88% more livable that the rest of the US

Uranus is a gas giant.

Team 444: Member# 536

RadioFreeSeaLab

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,200
Feds after Google data
« Reply #8 on: January 19, 2006, 10:30:52 AM »
I know you were joking...
But where can I send a check? Smiley

charby

  • Necromancer
  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29,295
  • APS's Resident Sikh/Muslim
Feds after Google data
« Reply #9 on: January 19, 2006, 10:33:39 AM »
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Iowa- 88% more livable that the rest of the US

Uranus is a gas giant.

Team 444: Member# 536

RadioFreeSeaLab

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,200
Feds after Google data
« Reply #10 on: January 19, 2006, 10:36:23 AM »
Bah.  Too much of my money already goes to that address.

onions!

  • Guest
Feds after Google data
« Reply #11 on: January 19, 2006, 10:41:46 AM »
I thought Edwin Meese went by the wayside almost twenty years ago...

Standing Wolf

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,978
Feds after Google data
« Reply #12 on: January 19, 2006, 06:22:52 PM »
I'd like to know why the federal government doesn't do something about the millions upon millions of illegal aliens that pose an actual danger to the nation instead of trying to harass software companies into doing its research for dumb laws.

Are you sure Jorge Bush has a plan?
No tyrant should ever be allowed to die of natural causes.

RadioFreeSeaLab

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,200
Feds after Google data
« Reply #13 on: January 19, 2006, 06:24:46 PM »
Ya, he has a plan.  It isn't a plan you or I would like, but he's got a plan alright.

brimic

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,270
Feds after Google data
« Reply #14 on: January 19, 2006, 06:32:24 PM »
I never cared for google, don't like the guy in charge of google, but my respect for the company just went up about 2 notches.

I would tell goobermint to check their carnivore/echelon records, its all there.
"now you see that evil will always triumph, because good is dumb" -Dark Helmet

"AK47's belong in the hands of soldiers mexican drug cartels"-
Barack Obama

Antibubba

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,836
Feds after Google data
« Reply #15 on: January 20, 2006, 08:47:47 AM »
What irony!  GMail is designed to track every subject and link it's user connect to, to better direct advertising.  Do a google scan and half a dozen links to Google's product advertisers pops up first.  Google does more internal tracking than the Feds do.  And then they sell that personalized intimate info to whoever meets their price.

Google isn't protecting us-they're just defiant because the gov'mint wants the info for free!   If they'd put in a proper bid for it this whole story might not have ever existed.

It's the main reason I use Teoma when I can-not that any other engine isn't gathering info.  Google embraced it first and most, though.
If life gives you melons, you may be dyslexic.

Vodka7

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,067
Feds after Google data
« Reply #16 on: January 20, 2006, 10:04:12 AM »
What's more interesting than Google saying no is that MSN, AOL, and Yahoo all said yes.

Guest

  • Guest
Feds after Google data
« Reply #17 on: January 20, 2006, 09:10:03 PM »
Quote from: Vodka7
What's more interesting than Google saying no is that MSN, AOL, and Yahoo all said yes.
I think Google's actual concern is that they are worried that their consumers will learn just how much information they have available for sale. I seriously doubt that google is concerned about your privacy, they are worried about backlash from their customers.

Ben

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 46,412
  • I'm an Extremist!
Feds after Google data
« Reply #18 on: January 21, 2006, 06:18:43 AM »
Quote
I think Google's actual concern is that they are worried that their consumers will learn just how much information they have available for sale. I seriously doubt that google is concerned about your privacy, they are worried about backlash from their customers.
My initial reaction was "good for Google", but the more I read about the whole debacle, the more I agree with this statement. I still don't believe the .gov should be able to get the data (today it's child porn, when Hillary is in it's "searches for gunsmithing services"), but when you look at just what Google and other business sites collect about you, or what you and I can collect about each other for $19.95, the .gov request is amateurish.
"I'm a foolish old man that has been drawn into a wild goose chase by a harpy in trousers and a nincompoop."

HForrest

  • Guest
Feds after Google data
« Reply #19 on: January 22, 2006, 07:25:59 PM »
Quote
The law was meant to punish online pornography sites that make their content accessible to minors.
WTF? That's a terrible excuse to violate privacy rights.