Yeah uh, it's pretty obvious this guy doesn't really care about the privacy thing, but cares about getting a lot of money from Google. How many people does he even represent that want to be compensated?
Google faces UK legal action for bypassing iPhone privacy settings to target ads
31–40 of 70 posts
Re: Google faces UK legal action for bypassing iPhone privacy settings to target ads
#32So Google deployed malware against... tens of millions of people?... in order to steal confidential data for profit, by bypassing security mechanisms on those devices as they interacted with Google servers, exceeding authorized access, and using installed code to track the activities of people against their efforts to raise technical barriers? That sounds like an international criminal act on a scale most malware aut…
..as opposed to the lily-white lack of criminality of communism or socialism? Criminality occurs everywhere within every system, the only difference is who is committing it and the degree of which it it reported.
Re: Google faces UK legal action for bypassing iPhone privacy settings to target ads
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
How were they able to set tracking cookies, if the browser had them disabled?
With a technical workaround. The thing is, when does improving browser compatibility count as hacking? Most major websites "hacked" IE with a fake P3P header. This is not that different. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/8048306/what-is-the-most... http://alexanderhiggins.com/google-fined-22-5m-for-hacking-s...
By your definition here a buffer overflow exploit is a "technical workaround". >.>
Re: Google faces UK legal action for bypassing iPhone privacy settings to target ads
#34It's going to become increasingly expensive and politically complex to operate an Internet company at Internet scale. That process of country to country division (legally/politically), will continue to accelerate. Although they're getting the first punches to the face because they're easy and obvious targets, companies like Google or Facebook, will trivially withstand it over time. They can afford whatever compliance…
> If I want to offer an Internet-wide service in the near future, I'll need to comply with dozens of different Internet-related legal/political frameworks to spread into dozens of nations.
No, you don't. You'll have it a lot easier than Google or Facebook, because you don't have local offices in more than one country, and you should keep it that way as long as you possibly can. As long as you have offices in exactly one jurisdiction, you are only subject to the laws of that jurisdiction. You can generally safely ignore the attempted overreach of others.
Re: Google faces UK legal action for bypassing iPhone privacy settings to target ads
#35Yeah uh, it's pretty obvious this guy doesn't really care about the privacy thing, but cares about getting a lot of money from Google. How many people does he even represent that want to be compensated?
If he's a lawyer he's acting on behest of his clients.
It's definitely a problem in consumer culture that big companies can rip people off and break the law without facing consequences - so long as they are only jacking people a little bit at a time.
If Google was caught breaking the law, it would be appropriate if one of their officers went to jail over it.
Re: Google faces UK legal action for bypassing iPhone privacy settings to target ads
#36So Google deployed malware against... tens of millions of people?... in order to steal confidential data for profit, by bypassing security mechanisms on those devices as they interacted with Google servers, exceeding authorized access, and using installed code to track the activities of people against their efforts to raise technical barriers? That sounds like an international criminal act on a scale most malware aut…
I don't know why this is getting downvoted. They did, in fact, acted against someone's setting not to do this, and I completely agree, this is a criminal act, not just a technical glitch.
IMHO storing cookies in a machine explicitly configured to block them seems to fit the "exceeds authorized access" language of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.
Re: Google faces UK legal action for bypassing iPhone privacy settings to target ads
#37On the surface this new incident says Google doesn't care about privacy. Most agree with this assessment.
But taken a step further it seems fair to ask:
- Has Google lost its edge? Why has nefarious replaced innovation?
- What else are they doing that we don't yet know about?
- Is it time for Google to update its biz model so it isn't so dependent on being so driven (to desperation)?
- Finally, is it time for the market to reconsider Google's role in defining our collective future?
On a personal note, if I can be fairly certain Apple isn't going to "pimp my data" I would give an iphone a serious consideration.
Re: Google faces UK legal action for bypassing iPhone privacy settings to target ads
#38Google told the BBC: "This is not new - we have defended similar cases before. We don't believe it has any merit and we will contest it." Google agreed to pay a record $22.5m (£16.8m) in a case brought by the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) on the same issue in 2012. It will be interesting how this one ends, here's hoping for a pro consumer verdict.
Translation: We've paid before. Haven't learned our lesson. And consider such fines as the cost of doing business.
They should drop "Don't be evil" and change it to "You didnt need that privacy anyway".
Re: Google faces UK legal action for bypassing iPhone privacy settings to target ads
#39Yeah uh, it's pretty obvious this guy doesn't really care about the privacy thing, but cares about getting a lot of money from Google. How many people does he even represent that want to be compensated?
He's the former director of the Consumer's Association - a charity dedicated to protecting consumer rights across the UK and that runs Which? magazine. There's a few things I disagree with about Which? but if there's anyone with impeccable credentials to run this type of lawsuit, it's him.
Re: Google faces UK legal action for bypassing iPhone privacy settings to target ads
#40Google told the BBC: "This is not new - we have defended similar cases before. We don't believe it has any merit and we will contest it." Google agreed to pay a record $22.5m (£16.8m) in a case brought by the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) on the same issue in 2012. It will be interesting how this one ends, here's hoping for a pro consumer verdict.
Translation: We've paid before. Haven't learned our lesson. And consider such fines as the cost of doing business. They should drop "Don't be evil" and change it to "You didnt need that privacy anyway".
Actually, they did drop it.