5 ms·

"European Union legislation requires companies to protect the personal information of EU citizens" It's the law. What's more, it's a good law. I am concerned t

"European Union legislation requires companies to protect the personal information of EU citizens" It's the law. What's more, it's a good law. I am concerned that they broke it, and seem to have tried to hide this.

yanw 15y ago
The Patriot Act seems to trump EU law in many cases, as security fears oft trump privacy concerns. It's a good discussion to be had for sure, am I'm sure EU parliament members will debate it in length: They don't seem to have tried to hide anything. From another report: http://www.h-online.com/security/news/item/Google-also-passes-on-European-data-to-US-authorities-1319434.htmlN http://www.h-online.com/security/news/item/Google-also-passe... The previous Microsoft admission that sparked this line of questioning: http://www.h-online.com/news/item/US-authorities-have-access-to-European-cloud-data-1270961.html http://www.h-online.com/news/item/US-authorities-have-access... Relevant: the Google Transparency Report: http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/ http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/
- StrawberryFrog 15y ago
  How does the "The Patriot Act seem to trump the EU law" ? In what sense? I reject the idea that a US law is more important in Europe than an European one. If that is what has happened, then it is wrong. If nothing was hidden, why is this policy only coming to light after the fact? There seems to be some degree of not wanting people to know.
  - yanw 15y ago
    I'm sure that a secret agreement between EU governments and the US have been reached, as is the case when security is involved.
    - StrawberryFrog 15y ago
      Quite likely. That'd doesn't make it legal, necessary or even a good idea.
  - aik 15y ago
    From the article "but they [the companies] can be forced to keep quiet about it in order to avoid exposing active investigations and alert those targeted by the probes." There are a number of reasons why both the government and the companies would want to keep it secret: 1. Bad reputation for the company. 2. Bad reputation for the government on how much spying they actually are doing. 3. "keep quiet about it in order to avoid exposing active investigations" (this point I would think to be irrelevant in this case however)
    - StrawberryFrog 15y ago
      > There are a number of reasons why both the government and the companies would want to keep it secret: Which are much the same reasons why someone who has stolen a TV would want to keep that secret. It doesn't make it an idea worth encouraging.
    - tomp 15y ago
      The US companies can be forced by the US government to be kept quiet about the data they revealed. However, their subsidiaries are European companies, and therefore must comply to EU law, therefore they shouldn't share the data, and if they do, that's a crime, and if they furthermore keep quiet about it, it's an even bigger crime. I think they should be punished by law to the fullest extent available. Along with everybody that was responsible and is within the reach of EU law. Actually, the EU should request extradition of those responsible that reside in the US, even if they didn't break the US law. Fair, isn't it?
- arethuza 15y ago
  "The Patriot Act seems to trump the EU law in many cases" For the parts of Google in the US - yes. For the parts of Google in the EU - no.
  - power 15y ago
    But the parts of Google in the US shouldn't have access to EU citizens' information if they're upholding the EU law
    - arethuza 15y ago
      Well, there is that as well. But I guess most people are less concerned about Google US having access to their data (even if it is illegal) than their data being given to US intelligence agencies.
- fun2have 15y ago
  I don't understand why you think that the Patriot Act seems to trump the EU law. The companies have separate subsidiaries in Europe. What the Patriot Act seams to be doing is Piercing the corporate veil. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piercing_the_corporate_veil http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piercing_the_corporate_veil. Making the EU company break EU law.
  - tomp 15y ago
    > Making the EU company break EU law. That's a very incorrect statement. Noone can make you break the law. In this case, the correct interpretation is, preventing US companies from having EU subsidiaries. Which means that the US offices have to be a subsidiary of some overseas corporation (i.e. make Google incorporate in Europe, or possibly some tax&law haven, like Cayman islands (I don't actually know about the laws there, but I'm sure there is a place on earth that would be ok)).
- rmc 15y ago
  The Patriot Act does not trump EU law here, because the Patriot Act is not in force in the EU, it is not the law of the land in the EU, and is not legal.
- magicalist 15y ago
  that report just cites the link you gave in your original comment.
davidw 15y ago
> I am concerned that they broke it, and seem to have tried to hide this. By, uh, mentioning it to journalists? There's a difference between hiding something and simply not announcing it loudly to the world.
- StrawberryFrog 15y ago
  > There's a difference between hiding something and simply not announcing it loudly to the world But not a huge difference. It's something that would definitely be of interest.
  - jonknee 15y ago
    Hiding it would be not telling it to journalists... It's a huge difference.
    - StrawberryFrog 15y ago
      I don't think it's huge. Compare "Honey I lied about cheating on you" with "Honey, I didn't tell you that I was cheating on you". It's a fine line when it's information that you know is relevant.
christkv 15y ago
I would expect my EU government to impose sanctions on google forcing them to put a banner on all pages they serve to inside EU advertising that your information might be handed over to us intelligence services.

yanw 15y ago

The Patriot Act seems to trump EU law in many cases, as security fears oft trump privacy concerns. It's a good discussion to be had for sure, am I'm sure EU parliament members will debate it in length: They don't seem to have tried to hide anything. From another report: http://www.h-online.com/security/news/item/Google-also-passes-on-European-data-to-US-authorities-1319434.htmlN http://www.h-online.com/security/news/item/Google-also-passe... The previous Microsoft admission that sparked this line of questioning: http://www.h-online.com/news/item/US-authorities-have-access-to-European-cloud-data-1270961.html http://www.h-online.com/news/item/US-authorities-have-access... Relevant: the Google Transparency Report: http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/ http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/

StrawberryFrog 15y ago
How does the "The Patriot Act seem to trump the EU law" ? In what sense? I reject the idea that a US law is more important in Europe than an European one. If that is what has happened, then it is wrong. If nothing was hidden, why is this policy only coming to light after the fact? There seems to be some degree of not wanting people to know.
- yanw 15y ago
  I'm sure that a secret agreement between EU governments and the US have been reached, as is the case when security is involved.
  - StrawberryFrog 15y ago
    Quite likely. That'd doesn't make it legal, necessary or even a good idea.
- aik 15y ago
  From the article "but they [the companies] can be forced to keep quiet about it in order to avoid exposing active investigations and alert those targeted by the probes." There are a number of reasons why both the government and the companies would want to keep it secret: 1. Bad reputation for the company. 2. Bad reputation for the government on how much spying they actually are doing. 3. "keep quiet about it in order to avoid exposing active investigations" (this point I would think to be irrelevant in this case however)
  - StrawberryFrog 15y ago
    > There are a number of reasons why both the government and the companies would want to keep it secret: Which are much the same reasons why someone who has stolen a TV would want to keep that secret. It doesn't make it an idea worth encouraging.
  - tomp 15y ago
    The US companies can be forced by the US government to be kept quiet about the data they revealed. However, their subsidiaries are European companies, and therefore must comply to EU law, therefore they shouldn't share the data, and if they do, that's a crime, and if they furthermore keep quiet about it, it's an even bigger crime. I think they should be punished by law to the fullest extent available. Along with everybody that was responsible and is within the reach of EU law. Actually, the EU should request extradition of those responsible that reside in the US, even if they didn't break the US law. Fair, isn't it?
arethuza 15y ago
"The Patriot Act seems to trump the EU law in many cases" For the parts of Google in the US - yes. For the parts of Google in the EU - no.
- power 15y ago
  But the parts of Google in the US shouldn't have access to EU citizens' information if they're upholding the EU law
  - arethuza 15y ago
    Well, there is that as well. But I guess most people are less concerned about Google US having access to their data (even if it is illegal) than their data being given to US intelligence agencies.
fun2have 15y ago
I don't understand why you think that the Patriot Act seems to trump the EU law. The companies have separate subsidiaries in Europe. What the Patriot Act seams to be doing is Piercing the corporate veil. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piercing_the_corporate_veil http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piercing_the_corporate_veil. Making the EU company break EU law.
- tomp 15y ago
  > Making the EU company break EU law. That's a very incorrect statement. Noone can make you break the law. In this case, the correct interpretation is, preventing US companies from having EU subsidiaries. Which means that the US offices have to be a subsidiary of some overseas corporation (i.e. make Google incorporate in Europe, or possibly some tax&law haven, like Cayman islands (I don't actually know about the laws there, but I'm sure there is a place on earth that would be ok)).
rmc 15y ago
The Patriot Act does not trump EU law here, because the Patriot Act is not in force in the EU, it is not the law of the land in the EU, and is not legal.
magicalist 15y ago
that report just cites the link you gave in your original comment.

davidw 15y ago

> I am concerned that they broke it, and seem to have tried to hide this. By, uh, mentioning it to journalists? There's a difference between hiding something and simply not announcing it loudly to the world.

StrawberryFrog 15y ago
> There's a difference between hiding something and simply not announcing it loudly to the world But not a huge difference. It's something that would definitely be of interest.
- jonknee 15y ago
  Hiding it would be not telling it to journalists... It's a huge difference.
  - StrawberryFrog 15y ago
    I don't think it's huge. Compare "Honey I lied about cheating on you" with "Honey, I didn't tell you that I was cheating on you". It's a fine line when it's information that you know is relevant.

christkv 15y ago

I would expect my EU government to impose sanctions on google forcing them to put a banner on all pages they serve to inside EU advertising that your information might be handed over to us intelligence services.