5 ms·

Google 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

by a_imho 9y ago

Google 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.

tomalpha 9y ago
Likewise. The line immediately after your quote also looks interesting, though clearly not precedent-setting in and of itself: The firm also settled out of court with a small number of British consumers.
chiefalchemist 9y ago
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".
- karimdag 9y ago
  Actually, they did drop it.
  - freeflight 9y ago
    "Do the right thing" just gives that much more wiggle room.
    - AlphaSite 9y ago
      Yeah, for example, for whom?
  - lern_too_spel 9y ago
    No, they didn't. https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct.html https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct.html
OwlsParliament 9y ago
$20m is a drop in the ocean to Google. This really should be more impactful.
- ocdtrekkie 9y ago
  I suspect until there's a meaningful way for business executives to be extradited for violating another country's consumer protection laws, there will not be an adequate way to penalize corporations for international misconduct. Functionally, a company's max losses for violating a country's laws is loss of assets and business in that country, is it not? For an international corporation, very few countries have the ability to hold them to any sort of meaningful penalty, especially when a company like Google can simply withhold service to that country until the country begs them to restore it. (See Google News in Spain.) I find the current case involving Google in Canada interesting: After losing a right to be forgotten case in the Canadian Supreme Court, the highest law of that jurisdiction... Google filed (and 'won') a case in the Northern District of California to injunct it's ruling. ...I don't know about you, but I don't believe a US court can invalidate the Canadian Supreme Court's order... so doesn't that just put Google in contempt of court in Canada?
  - RestlessMind 9y ago
    IANAL but Canada's supreme court should have jurisdiction only over Canada. It wanted to force Google to remove search results globally and not just from Canadian website. Which authority grants them such powers? I think Google just exposed their bluff by challenging that order in another sovereign jurisdiction.
    - ocdtrekkie 9y ago
      As a sovereign nation, Canada can impose any restrictions or requirements on a business that exists in their country. (Google has three offices physically in Canada.) Presumably, Canada can pass any law or issue a judgement in keeping with their laws on how to punish an entity in it's borders for noncompliance with their commands. Those restrictions or requirements need not be limited to their borders. (For instance, the US prohibits companies from doing business with certain entities or persons in foreign countries. That continues to be true even if the person is not inside US borders.) So, insofar as Google, as a company that does business in Canada, has refused to obey Canadian law, I suspect that Canada would be entirely in keeping with the law to charge Google with any civil or criminal penalties for refusal to comply. A US court's ruling has no authority or interest in the matter of Canada telling a company in Canada what to do. I presume the end cap of Canada's powers (similarly to any sovereign nation) would be the seizure of all assets and closure of any business in Canada proper. Of course, within the grounds of whatever Canada's own laws allow. So while Canada may not have the sovereign right to force a company operating in another country to comply, it could presumably shut down all of Google's Canadian offices, ban them from doing business with the country, and any other penalty they feel like inside the country. If you want to do business in a country, you must follow that country's laws, even if you think it's unfair the country is imposing them. This is why Google decided to leave China.
whatyoucantsay 9y ago
Google doesn't believe the case for avoiding an Orwellian dystopia has any merit either. They want to track all your activities they possibly can, laws and consumer expectations be damned.

by a_imho 9y ago

tomalpha 9y ago

Likewise. The line immediately after your quote also looks interesting, though clearly not precedent-setting in and of itself: The firm also settled out of court with a small number of British consumers.

chiefalchemist 9y ago

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".

karimdag 9y ago
Actually, they did drop it.
- freeflight 9y ago
  "Do the right thing" just gives that much more wiggle room.
  - AlphaSite 9y ago
    Yeah, for example, for whom?
- lern_too_spel 9y ago
  No, they didn't. https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct.html https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct.html

OwlsParliament 9y ago

$20m is a drop in the ocean to Google. This really should be more impactful.

ocdtrekkie 9y ago
I suspect until there's a meaningful way for business executives to be extradited for violating another country's consumer protection laws, there will not be an adequate way to penalize corporations for international misconduct. Functionally, a company's max losses for violating a country's laws is loss of assets and business in that country, is it not? For an international corporation, very few countries have the ability to hold them to any sort of meaningful penalty, especially when a company like Google can simply withhold service to that country until the country begs them to restore it. (See Google News in Spain.) I find the current case involving Google in Canada interesting: After losing a right to be forgotten case in the Canadian Supreme Court, the highest law of that jurisdiction... Google filed (and 'won') a case in the Northern District of California to injunct it's ruling. ...I don't know about you, but I don't believe a US court can invalidate the Canadian Supreme Court's order... so doesn't that just put Google in contempt of court in Canada?
- RestlessMind 9y ago
  IANAL but Canada's supreme court should have jurisdiction only over Canada. It wanted to force Google to remove search results globally and not just from Canadian website. Which authority grants them such powers? I think Google just exposed their bluff by challenging that order in another sovereign jurisdiction.
  - ocdtrekkie 9y ago
    As a sovereign nation, Canada can impose any restrictions or requirements on a business that exists in their country. (Google has three offices physically in Canada.) Presumably, Canada can pass any law or issue a judgement in keeping with their laws on how to punish an entity in it's borders for noncompliance with their commands. Those restrictions or requirements need not be limited to their borders. (For instance, the US prohibits companies from doing business with certain entities or persons in foreign countries. That continues to be true even if the person is not inside US borders.) So, insofar as Google, as a company that does business in Canada, has refused to obey Canadian law, I suspect that Canada would be entirely in keeping with the law to charge Google with any civil or criminal penalties for refusal to comply. A US court's ruling has no authority or interest in the matter of Canada telling a company in Canada what to do. I presume the end cap of Canada's powers (similarly to any sovereign nation) would be the seizure of all assets and closure of any business in Canada proper. Of course, within the grounds of whatever Canada's own laws allow. So while Canada may not have the sovereign right to force a company operating in another country to comply, it could presumably shut down all of Google's Canadian offices, ban them from doing business with the country, and any other penalty they feel like inside the country. If you want to do business in a country, you must follow that country's laws, even if you think it's unfair the country is imposing them. This is why Google decided to leave China.

whatyoucantsay 9y ago

Google doesn't believe the case for avoiding an Orwellian dystopia has any merit either. They want to track all your activities they possibly can, laws and consumer expectations be damned.