Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google deletes artist’s blog, a decade of his work

fusion.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 457 posts

Re: Google deletes artist’s blog, a decade of his work

#301

Post by 794CD01 »

true_religion wrote: post #266
parineum wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But possession of child pornography is what's illegal. They very well may have reported the owner of the blog to the authorities but, in the mean time, google was both possessing and distributing the material. It's not that it's violating their TOS, it's that Google thought they may have been violating the law. EDIT: At least if that's what the content was.

From the OP who said: > "I've read a few of Cooper's books and the short answer is yes, pedophilia is a common theme in his writing (as is incest and necrophilia)." Because of the words 'book' and 'writing', I have the impression that everything there is written text and no certainly no pictures. This puts it in a nebulous position, at least in the USA. Dunlop v. U.S., 165 U.S. 486 (1897), ended up ruling that text-o…

"Directly resulting in their harm" is an unenforceable standard, unless you are referring to hitting someone with a printed copy, which I suspect you are not.

Re: Google deletes artist’s blog, a decade of his work

#302

Post by lotharbot »

ungzd wrote: post #100

If it's really due to some kind of erotic pictures, then I don't understand why often american companies like Google act like iranian. Is there any laws in USA that allows to punish Google for hosting images of woman nipples? Why both App store and Google play's TOS include sins from Old Testament?

Google is in competition with a lot of other companies, and they've decided they're in a stronger position if they don't set off a firestorm of criticism that gives people an excuse to move to a different service.

Even if you personally don't care about erotic pictures, if your grandma starts associating google with porn (because a case like this became high enough profile to get covered by the local news), and then you e-mail her from your google account, now you're having an uncomfortable conversation with your grandma. Or your wife or mother or sister or really conservative friend or whatever. Which isn't enough to make everyone leave, but it's enough to make some people leave, and pretty soon Bing or Yahoo would have bigger mindshare.

It's a lot easier for Google to just say "ToS violation = deleted" and be done with it, and occasionally have to reverse a decision if there's too much fallout.

Re: Google deletes artist’s blog, a decade of his work

#304

Post by sixothree »

jessaustin wrote: post #165
sliverstorm wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pots isn't open source...

Yeah I struggle to think of corporations more "unethical" than ATT and VZN.

I've heard stories from multiple people older than me about ATT physically entering people's homes (typically when their husbands were at work) because they had "illegal" extensions.

Re: Google deletes artist’s blog, a decade of his work

#305

Post by rsync »

true_religion wrote: post #266
parineum wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But possession of child pornography is what's illegal. They very well may have reported the owner of the blog to the authorities but, in the mean time, google was both possessing and distributing the material. It's not that it's violating their TOS, it's that Google thought they may have been violating the law. EDIT: At least if that's what the content was.

From the OP who said: > "I've read a few of Cooper's books and the short answer is yes, pedophilia is a common theme in his writing (as is incest and necrophilia)." Because of the words 'book' and 'writing', I have the impression that everything there is written text and no certainly no pictures. This puts it in a nebulous position, at least in the USA. Dunlop v. U.S., 165 U.S. 486 (1897), ended up ruling that text-o…

Meanwhile, on google.com, I can read excerpts of Lolita, by Nabokov:

https://books.google.com/books/about/Lolita.html?id=TOQxAgAA...

Re: Google deletes artist’s blog, a decade of his work

#306

Post by andrey_utkin »

Frondo wrote: post #267
andrey_utkin wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We need to follow Richard Stallman in his obsession with ehtics. "Sorry mate, I find FB/Google/Skype/etc. unethical, so I won't get in touch with you using this, let's better stick with email, phone call or meeting in person".

No, we just need to stop trying to solve social problems with technical solutions. Domain getting stolen by a registrar? That's a crime, treat it like theft, there ought to be some justice for that theft. Big business doing something awful/scandalous/inappropriate? Change the laws, and work to persuade people that it ought to be societally unacceptable to violate those laws. I see this a lot on tech-oriented forums,…

> stuff like this will stop happening when people's ethics expand to cover new stuff.

So you effectively agree that solid ethic opinions help fighting this. Then why you started your comment with "No, ..."? :)

Re: Google deletes artist’s blog, a decade of his work

#307

Post by madmax96 »

kennywinker wrote: post #273
madmax96 wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The data resided on Google's servers -- their property. Read the terms and conditions you agree to, Google doesn't owe you anything. > If it was art that borders on distasteful to some > then google is deciding taste and public values with > private algorithms. But that's well within their right to do. If you don't like it, there's an easy solution: don't use Google. This behavior is well-known (remember Google Reade…

> the fact that so many people are upset is indicative of the growing technological entitlement mentality A mentality Google fosters constantly with virtually all of their products. > You can get a 3 Terabyte backup drive today on Amazon The first words you see when you visit https://www.google.com/drive/ is "A safe place for all your files". > there are alternatives to using a hosting company Like what? Deeply techn…

    >  A mentality Google fosters constantly with virtually 
    > all of their products.
This statement has no relevance to the conversation -- it doesn't magically produce any obligation for Google to act differently than it does.

    > The first words you see when you visit 
    > https://www.google.com/drive/ is "A safe place for 
    > all your files".
And clearly in the terms of service (the only thing that actually matters,) it says:

    > Google may also stop providing Services to you, or 
    > add or create new limits to our Services at any time. [1]
Safety is subjective, that's how they can get away with this. The terms of service go on to say:

    > WHEN PERMITTED BY LAW, GOOGLE, AND GOOGLE’S SUPPLIERS 
    > AND DISTRIBUTORS, WILL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR LOST 
    > PROFITS, REVENUES, OR DATA, FINANCIAL LOSSES OR 
    > INDIRECT, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR 
    > PUNITIVE DAMAGES. [1]
That pretty much seals the deal. The user provides affirmative consent to all of this.

    > Like what? Deeply technical p2p hosting solutions 
    > that are completely inaccessible to all but the most 
    > adept readers and publishers?
Self hosting is a thing. Again, none of this is Google's problem.

    > Sure, but as we move most of our communication to 
    > the internet, this kind of thing becomes more and 
    > more problematic.
Using any service (online or offline) is inherently risky. Users are deciding to take that risk and then whining when the risk does not pay off. You remain free to distribute information however you like.

I'm not saying these aren't problems -- I'm saying these aren't Google's problems. They're running a business, not a technology charity. If you don't like it, don't use Google products and encourage others not to. It's simple cause and effect: Google treats us badly, we stop using Google. Google is free to operate however they like and I'm free to stop using their services.

[1] https://www.google.com/policies/terms/

EDIT: s/risking/risky/

Re: Google deletes artist’s blog, a decade of his work

#308

Post by Pica_soO »

janekm wrote: post #134

The fact that every single comment in this thread amounts to "should have backed up" makes me a little sad. Is this really what we want to expect from companies like Google? Is this acceptable? Is it just a "force of nature" that I should consider beyond the ken of man? What happened here is the abrogation of human responsibility onto algorithms, TOS, with no apparent human oversight. A very disturbing trend, and I t…

.. but its so much cheaper then a service provided by a real life human.

Re: Google deletes artist’s blog, a decade of his work

#309

Post by 794CD01 »

veridies wrote: post #274
mbesto wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That persona no longer exists. He's been all but disappeared, and it's going to take a long time for him to reconnect. If the internet didn't exist, an artist would have bought storage for his art. Why this artist feels that a service he didn't pay for owes him anything is baffling to me.

And if the artist had bought that storage, and then the storage company said "oh, we burned all your art for a terms of use violation," the artist would be rightly outraged. Sure, he's not paying, but Google doesn't ask for payment. They provide a service which is backed by Google's implicit guarantee that their web hosting is safe and reliable, and they've broken that guarantee. Google may not have a legal responsib…

My work isn't child pornography, so that reconsideration does not change my affirmative answer.

Re: Google deletes artist’s blog, a decade of his work

#310

Post by 794CD01 »

janekm wrote: post #134

The fact that every single comment in this thread amounts to "should have backed up" makes me a little sad. Is this really what we want to expect from companies like Google? Is this acceptable? Is it just a "force of nature" that I should consider beyond the ken of man? What happened here is the abrogation of human responsibility onto algorithms, TOS, with no apparent human oversight. A very disturbing trend, and I t…

Yes, this is exactly what you should expect from a free service like Google's. No reliability, and no support. If you need an SLA, pay for one.
Post reply on HN