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

Statement on Google’s conduct by founder of CelebrityNetWorth.com (2019) [pdf]

docs.house.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 271 posts

Re: Statement on Google’s conduct by founder of CelebrityNetWorth.com (2019) [pdf]

#61

Post by ehnto »

tehabe wrote: post #51

An odd witness for the very true issues people have with Google Search. Google is crediting all websites it uses information from. It might be sad for such a site but I wonder how the creator thought that this is sustainable. Sites with biographical data for famous people already existed and for them adding net worth information is easy. So if not Google had kill them, they might have being killed by IMDb oder Wikipe…

According to the document, the net worth was unique researched data that is still yet to be accurately replicated. In other words, the company created the data, they did not simply display it. If they were sunk by IMDb copying their data then the data source goes away too, unless IMDb invests in a research team.

What happens when CNW goes offline, how will Google replace the now missing data? Remembering that celebrities constantly change net worth and new ones show up every week, so it's a moving target that someone needs to chase.

Re: Statement on Google’s conduct by founder of CelebrityNetWorth.com (2019) [pdf]

#62

Post by tareqak »

tehabe wrote: post #51

An odd witness for the very true issues people have with Google Search. Google is crediting all websites it uses information from. It might be sad for such a site but I wonder how the creator thought that this is sustainable. Sites with biographical data for famous people already existed and for them adding net worth information is easy. So if not Google had kill them, they might have being killed by IMDb oder Wikipe…

Crediting the source while providing the information has the same benefit for the user accessing that information, but not the same benefit for website presenting that information. The website loses on whatever benefit a visiting user brings in e.g. advertising revenue, lead-in to a subscription / patronage, a plea for a donation etc.

I still remain very much against ads, but I have a more sympathetic take to financing journalism as a result of reading this account. Perhaps just having the headline be free, but having the rest be behind a paywall is a better middle ground?

Re: Statement on Google’s conduct by founder of CelebrityNetWorth.com (2019) [pdf]

#63

Post by piscisaureus »

mike_d wrote: post #31
errantmind wrote: post #20

It looks more like an ethical argument than a legal one. I don't understand how this data would be protected under US law. Can someone explain if you think otherwise? Is the issue that the data was scraped? Or is the issue Google appropriated the scraped data for use in their search results? From my perspective it just looks like a bad business model: spend a lot of time and effort estimating net worth, and then publ…

This has been settled case law for decades thanks to sports almanacs. Facts (like someones net worth) cannot be copyrighted. However a compilation of facts can be. If CNW had published a book, Google purchased it off of Amazon, and paid an intern to retype it in to fact boxes - that is clear copyright violation. The fact that Google bought the data from a third party data broker who scraped CNW does not absolve them…

> Facts (like someones net worth) cannot be copyrighted. However a compilation of facts can be.

... in the US.

In the EU and UK there is separate copyright-like legislation that covers this, so-called "database rights".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_right

Re: Statement on Google’s conduct by founder of CelebrityNetWorth.com (2019) [pdf]

#64

Post by markalexander »

Phaedor wrote: post #50
markalexander wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ethical is a bit of a wide term but I’m sure it’s easy to construct situations that are problematic. E.g. an abusive ex partner can check whether you’re likely to have switched job, even from the most basic info. If tax paid is revealed then you can work out what government benefits a person might be on, including those relating to health and disability. Isn’t the implementation in Norway such that the press have spe…

Everyone have access but you have to log in with your ID and the ones you check can see that you checked them. You can check 500 people each month. Your scenario seems pretty far fetched to me since this information will be published in October for the previous year. It contains the income and tax for the whole year only. It would be pretty difficult to know the information you suggest from the limited, delayed recor…

I’m not sure how delayed records would stop you working out disability status or any other sensitive status that affects tax paid. The tax regime for any given year is presumably public info.

People are notified but that’s hardly going to stop someone seeking to upset you as in the example scenario.

Though as I understand the press can do mass lookups with no notification. Don’t you find that disparity concerning? The idea that the government gets to decide what counts as ‘press’ is already something people from countries that don’t operate that way would consider objectionable. Let alone giving them the power to decide who should be 'outed' for their tax affairs.

To be fair, that's perhaps more an issue of this particular implementation, rather than fundamental. But it's an example of how it can be used to entrench the establishment.

Re: Statement on Google’s conduct by founder of CelebrityNetWorth.com (2019) [pdf]

#65

Post by xlii »

visarga wrote: post #2

I read the statement and think Google used and then and abused their service, but at the same time, publishing a database of people's net worth strikes me as being pretty unethical. Would they have been able to handle a GDPR request? Why didn't they put their own and their families info up there first?

In the transcribed hearing founder makes it clear that it's more about educated guess based on publicly available information. Net worth and not the owned assets which is completely different number (as celebrities usually have rights to their personal brands which are not transferable).

In general this in theory could be challenged, but mostly based on the name and photos and not about inferred information. This might get even worse since a lot of celebrities are using stage names which might be protected as a brand but go unprotected as a personal information.

Re: Statement on Google’s conduct by founder of CelebrityNetWorth.com (2019) [pdf]

#69

Post by Phaedor »

markalexander wrote: post #64
Phaedor wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone have access but you have to log in with your ID and the ones you check can see that you checked them. You can check 500 people each month. Your scenario seems pretty far fetched to me since this information will be published in October for the previous year. It contains the income and tax for the whole year only. It would be pretty difficult to know the information you suggest from the limited, delayed recor…

I’m not sure how delayed records would stop you working out disability status or any other sensitive status that affects tax paid. The tax regime for any given year is presumably public info. People are notified but that’s hardly going to stop someone seeking to upset you as in the example scenario. Though as I understand the press can do mass lookups with no notification. Don’t you find that disparity concerning? Th…

Everyone have pretty much unlimited access in practice so I dont see that the press have any special advantage. The press have guidelines that they should only publish the tax of public figures and I have not seen them abuse this so far.

We are a country with a high degree of social trust, and that is what I believe makes our country great. I realize that our system is not for everyone and that is fair.

Re: Statement on Google’s conduct by founder of CelebrityNetWorth.com (2019) [pdf]

#70

Post by erikbye »

doctor_eval wrote: post #24
onion2k wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some things are facts, like the density of steel or the list of historical US presidents. But other things aren't facts, and where something isn't a fact but instead is implicit knowledge derived from a set of both data and assumptions (like a model or an algorithm) Google should absolutely not be taking that data and treating it as their own. Given the PDF includes this quote " I decided to build a company that atte…

This is interesting. The final outcome could be that CNW shuts down. Then, the data won’t be updated. So then google will have to drop the info box. And then someone will come along with an idea to track the net worth of celebrities... Has Google set up some kind of hysteresis that results in the long term, repeated building and subsequent crushing of data aggregation companies?

> Then, the data won’t be updated. So then google will have to drop the info box

Google won't drop the info box, they don't care if the information is accurate.

Post reply on HN