Google has been accused of “hypocrisy” over its stance on personal privacy.

In court documents defending a lawsuit brought against its Street View mapping tool it has asserted that “complete privacy doesn’t exist.”

But, points out the US National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC) it responded to a Californian politician’s concerns about its growth by saying that it “takes privacy very seriously”.

“Google’s hypocrisy is breathtaking,” said Ken Boehm, chairman of the NLPC….

The assertion about privacy came in court papers Google filed in response to a lawsuit from Aaron and Christine Boring. The couple launched their legal action when images of their Pennsylvania home appeared on Street View….

In its court documents Google said: “Today’s satellite-image technology means that even in today’s desert, complete privacy does not exist.”….

In an effort to turn the tables on Google the NLPC compiled a comprehensive amount of personal information on an unnamed Google executive in less than 30 minutes

It included the licence plates of cars outside the individual’s home, the landscaping company the exec uses and even the name of the next door neighbour’s security company.

The Centre used Google Street View and Google Earth to gather all the necessary information which it released publicly it said to “highlight the invasiveness of these technologies to individual privacy.”

Street view seems pretty tame. Don’t scratch your privates when you’re out in the front yard and you’ll be fine. Personally I don’t consider Google any more of a hypocrite than any other company that claims to protect my privacy. I just assume as a matter of course that any company will trash my privacy if the time comes that it is to its benefit to do so.

Thanks, K B




  1. Paranoid Soldier says:

    Google just flat out scares me. When you read your Gmail and see relevant ads in the margins that correspond to the email content that’s way over the line. I’m sure they’re recording that data and using it to profile. Don’t forget that if you’re signed in to Google like via Gmail, by default all your Google searches are recorded. I’m sure even when you turn this off Google still collects your search data to further profile you.

    Be Scared… Be Very Scared!

  2. GigG says:

    What level of privacy can one assume they are owed when they are walking down a public street?

    I think these folks bitching about street view are just looking at a company with lots of money and trying to think of ways to get some of it. They couldn’t care less about privacy.

  3. GregAllen says:

    If Google compromised their core principles for a foreign country like China, you KNOW they’ll give you up to the US government, just for the asking.

  4. bobbo says:

    Hah. With Poster, #1, and #2 against “scary privacy raping google” that leaves #3 and myself as reasonable people being out voted so far.

    You chicken little sci-fi fans need to appreciate the difference between “privacy” and “anonymity.” There is no reasonable expectation of privacy when you are in public–so yes, if you don’t want anyone to see you scratching your balls, do it in private.

    The thing that pisses me off about Google Earth anyway is that the resolution is obviously obscured. I love going all over the globe looking at things. Would love to catch a seaman pissing off the side of a boat, but the resolution is not there.

    I still say the CIA had OJ Simpson on satellite tape and would not reveal his route/time of travel in order to keep the system a secret.

  5. MikeN says:

    the word complete carries plenty of meaning there.
    No contradiction at all. Their actions in China on the other hand.

  6. GregAllen says:

    I call on all Geeks to design our tools to protect us from fascist corporations, too.

    What you do on the internet should be for you and YOU ALONE to know.

    Not your government. Not OTHER governments. Not your ISP. Not Google. Not your boss. Not the snoopy ISP guy at work.

    G’mon Geeks! The window of opportunity is NOW. Redesign our browsers for privacy. Redesign servers. Redesign the packet system. Redesign it all for privacy.

  7. Corey says:

    Maybe I’m just very naive, but I don’t really care about privacy that much. What do I care if some asshole knows I read Dvorak.org?

    Sure I don’t want anyone snooping through my bank records or anything, but I highly doubt Google is doing that, and even if they were, it’s not like they’re getting full account numbers or anything. Most bank websites only list the last four numbers of the account number.

    As for “snooping” through email, it would be impossible for humans to read all your Gmail and pick ads that are relevant, it’s all computers! And what do I care if a computer reads my email? My computer sifts through my email every day. Besides, Google is giving me potentially useful information (unobtrusive, targeted ads) by doing that, with no harm done to me.

    People are just blowing this way the hell out of proportion. I’m not saying privacy on the Internet isn’t an issue at all, but I’m not afraid of Google. Nothing they can do would ever ruin my reputation, or financially destroy me. The worst thing Google could do to me is delete all my email and documents and that’s all backed up anyway.

  8. montanaguy says:

    #8 Probably the reasonable middle ground. Most people voluntarily give up more information about themselves, particularly on the internet, than any evil search engine could dig up. Your health insurance company (and all the brokers they communicate with) probably know more about you than your spouse does and like any company they are hackable.

    #5 Bobbo: Is this just speculation on your part or do you know something we don’t know? What’s with the fascination with watching guys piss? Interesting. Now we know just one more thing about you, and of course Google has already picked it up and your pissing/voyeurism is already known world-wide.

  9. bobbo says:

    #10–montanadude==Well, since you raise the issue, I made that up. I do like zooming in on boats==last time during the Panama Passage but resolution goes way before being able to see people on deck, much less pissing.

    Pissing was manufactured to make it relevant to a charge of invasion of privacy==like ball scratching==like screwing sheep in Montana. Things people do in public that technically have no reasonable expectation of privacy. I’m sure you know what I’m talking about.

  10. Arous says:

    Don’t expect any privacy outside your closed doors and windows and then even that is becomming suspect!

  11. the answer says:

    I wouldn’t trust my own mom with my info on the net. Sure enough she can send it somewhere it is not supposed to. It would be stupid to trust a company like google.

  12. Fair Trade says:

    ISPs know everything about our internet travails and they are telecomms people ie they cave in to government at the first opportunity; they don’t even wait for a request in writing.
    Don’t worry about Goog; it’s closer to home you have to worry about…

  13. GregAllen says:

    … that’s why we need the to have security built right into our tools. Technologies like SSL, double key encryption, signatures and proxies need to be STANDARD.

    Yes, with enough effort and extra, you implement most of those but that just flags you to your government.

    But, if EVERYBODY used those tools, our lives would be much more secure.

  14. montanaguy says:

    #11
    Don’t be knocking sheep now…. just the way they look at you…..
    There are certain super hi-res places… check out Cambridge, MA… you can easily see people walking around Harvard Yard.

  15. bobbo says:

    #16–montana==thanks for the tip. I do enjoy googling places I’ve been, and places I haven’t been as well. I guess I am part voyeur–but sometimes I do get the feeling of being in an airplane. Good way to save oil?

  16. comhcinc says:

    if you don’t like google then don’t use it. problem solved lets move on.

  17. bh28630 says:

    GregAllen said

    “I call on all Geeks to design our tools to protect us from fascist corporations, too.”

    OK, so let’s say I offer unbreakable Internet communication you can establish between yourself and as many friends and colleagues as you’d like. (I can, btw) Do you know how many people really care? In my experience, next to no one. It’s sad but reality is either we’re too unaware how easy it is to snoop e-mail and FTP activity (web sites are worse) or we don’t care.

  18. deowll says:

    All these companies have their heads up everybody’s bum.

    Candid Camera is now a fact of daily life.

  19. GregAllen says:

    >> bh28630 said,
    >> Do you know how many people really care? In my experience, next to no one.

    Oh, I understand that very well.

    I lived in the United Arab Emirates where everything was screened and monitored and IT SUCKED.

    It sucked that you were hitting perfectly innocent blocked sites all the time and it sucked that the proxy stalled all the time.

    Is also sucked that pro-democracy activists were tracked and deported as well as those working for sexual preference or religious freedoms.

    Yet, when they took a survey, most people said they didn’t care.

    Even so, that country DESPERATELY needs the privacy tools I’m talking about, even if most people are “sheepy” to know that.

    Also, it isn’t just about privacy … it’s about security, too. Against scammers, stalkers, predators, identity thieves, etc.

  20. bh28630 says:

    GregAllen said,
    “it isn’t just about privacy … it’s about security, too. Against scammers, stalkers, predators, identity thieves, etc.”

    I agree and was motivated to develop an easy to use, affordable software solution. That’s also how I know there is little genuine interest in protecting information. The majority of managers, executives and more than a few IT people truly don’t know or care about the vulnerability of their data.


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 12118 access attempts in the last 7 days.