6 ms·

While I don't necessarily agree with it, I don't see why people feel entitled to claim this as a free speech violation etc. It's Google's storage property and

While I don't necessarily agree with it, I don't see why people feel entitled to claim this as a free speech violation etc. It's Google's storage property and they can remove whatever they want from it. They're not obligated to host anything.

dannyw 4y ago
That is a scary concept in a world where cloud storage is becoming the default, and local storage may become extinct.
- AlexandrB 4y ago
  If you care about it, don't store it exclusively in the cloud (AKA somebody else's computer). Consumer cloud services offer no guarantees of the longevity of your data and providers like Google are well-known for turning off services that are not profitable to them with minimal warning.
naasking 4y ago
> It's Google's storage property and they can remove whatever they want from it. Many people are paying for that storage. I'm not sure Google should have the right to remove anything they want from it, just like the phone companies should not have the right to bleep out words in my phone conversations.
OrangeMonkey 4y ago
Oh I simply can't wait until the current 'well actually, its not a free speech since its a corporation" group find that their telephone conversations are filtered or anytime they try to type certain words into a web browser that their isp drops packets. We about to speedrun why freedom of speech is important!
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- belltaco 4y ago
  Bad example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_carrier#Telecommunications https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_carrier#Telecommunicati...
  - OrangeMonkey 4y ago
    Great example - shows that government enforcement of free speech requirements work. I wonder, if this was proposed today, if it would have passed.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
- bilekas 4y ago
  I'm not arguing that it's not important, as I said I don't agree with it but when simply accepting all ToS, T&C's without even reviewing them becomes the norm, what do you expect ?
- googlryas 4y ago
  Freedom of speech: not just the law - it's a good idea too!
  - bilekas 4y ago
    It's also only related to Government infringement. Not private companies.
    - slowmovintarget 4y ago
      I used to think that too. The problem with that formulation is that corporations control much of what was previously either unregulated or the province of government in the sense of legal restrictions against government power. The public square is the internet these days. Freedom of speech is important enough that speaking in the public square should be protected, even when the square is seemingly owned and operated by a corporation... and probably especially then.
      - bilekas 4y ago
        > The public square is the internet these days. That's a nice idea, but it simply isn't reality.
    - googlryas 4y ago
      My point was that it isn't just the law, it's a good thing generally to encourage, even if there are no legal requirements to do so.
Ekaros 4y ago
I wonder how happy these people would be if they were renters and stored some material in their house that their landlords disagreed with. And then landlord would enter and remove that material.
- alphabettsy 4y ago
  I take your point, but we’ve already decided in this country that owners rights are more important than renters. I don’t see how cloud storage is much different. Maybe ownership should be different in this circumstance? You might be surprised to learn that a landlord can charge extra or evict someone for nearly anything including working on/having cars they don’t like, having the wrong breed of dog, being LGBT, etc.
indymike 4y ago
> They're not obligated to host anything. Not when I pay rent to store my stuff on it. Then they are obligated to make google drive work like a drive where I put my files in, and when queried for them, my files come back out.
- bilekas 4y ago
  You're making assumptions of the user and their google plan. We don't know if they're paying. The bottom line is this. People can down-vote this comment all day. The facts are as they stand. Google has the right to remove whatever they want. You're free to host your own content at any time.
  - indymike 4y ago
    > You're making assumptions of the user and their google plan. We don't know if they're paying. From my post: "Not when I pay rent to store my stuff on it." I wasn't talking about them, I was talking about my own relationship with Google, and my expectation that a vendor provides the service they promised to in exchange for my money. > Google has the right to remove whatever they want. Nope.
- AlexandrB 4y ago
  I haven't read their TOS, but there's almost certainly a clause about how the service comes with no warranty and you're storing your data at your own risk. So they're not obligated to do anything really. They could decide to replace all your files with RickRoll videos and I doubt you'd have grounds to sue.
  - indymike 4y ago
    > but there's almost certainly a clause about how the service comes with no warranty and you're storing your data at your own risk You can disclaim liability all you want, but there comes a point where you are selling data storage, and not delivering what you sold. Also, believe it or not, contract can contain terms and exclusions that are illegal and will be set aside in a lawsuit. > So they're not obligated to do anything really. This is what everyone sued for fraud or breach of contract thinks before an expensive, long, slow education takes place.

dannyw 4y ago

That is a scary concept in a world where cloud storage is becoming the default, and local storage may become extinct.

AlexandrB 4y ago
If you care about it, don't store it exclusively in the cloud (AKA somebody else's computer). Consumer cloud services offer no guarantees of the longevity of your data and providers like Google are well-known for turning off services that are not profitable to them with minimal warning.

naasking 4y ago

> It's Google's storage property and they can remove whatever they want from it. Many people are paying for that storage. I'm not sure Google should have the right to remove anything they want from it, just like the phone companies should not have the right to bleep out words in my phone conversations.

OrangeMonkey 4y ago

Oh I simply can't wait until the current 'well actually, its not a free speech since its a corporation" group find that their telephone conversations are filtered or anytime they try to type certain words into a web browser that their isp drops packets. We about to speedrun why freedom of speech is important!

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
belltaco 4y ago
Bad example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_carrier#Telecommunications https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_carrier#Telecommunicati...
- OrangeMonkey 4y ago
  Great example - shows that government enforcement of free speech requirements work. I wonder, if this was proposed today, if it would have passed.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
bilekas 4y ago
I'm not arguing that it's not important, as I said I don't agree with it but when simply accepting all ToS, T&C's without even reviewing them becomes the norm, what do you expect ?
googlryas 4y ago
Freedom of speech: not just the law - it's a good idea too!
- bilekas 4y ago
  It's also only related to Government infringement. Not private companies.
  - slowmovintarget 4y ago
    I used to think that too. The problem with that formulation is that corporations control much of what was previously either unregulated or the province of government in the sense of legal restrictions against government power. The public square is the internet these days. Freedom of speech is important enough that speaking in the public square should be protected, even when the square is seemingly owned and operated by a corporation... and probably especially then.
    - bilekas 4y ago
      > The public square is the internet these days. That's a nice idea, but it simply isn't reality.
  - googlryas 4y ago
    My point was that it isn't just the law, it's a good thing generally to encourage, even if there are no legal requirements to do so.

Ekaros 4y ago

I wonder how happy these people would be if they were renters and stored some material in their house that their landlords disagreed with. And then landlord would enter and remove that material.

alphabettsy 4y ago
I take your point, but we’ve already decided in this country that owners rights are more important than renters. I don’t see how cloud storage is much different. Maybe ownership should be different in this circumstance? You might be surprised to learn that a landlord can charge extra or evict someone for nearly anything including working on/having cars they don’t like, having the wrong breed of dog, being LGBT, etc.

indymike 4y ago

> They're not obligated to host anything. Not when I pay rent to store my stuff on it. Then they are obligated to make google drive work like a drive where I put my files in, and when queried for them, my files come back out.

bilekas 4y ago
You're making assumptions of the user and their google plan. We don't know if they're paying. The bottom line is this. People can down-vote this comment all day. The facts are as they stand. Google has the right to remove whatever they want. You're free to host your own content at any time.
- indymike 4y ago
  > You're making assumptions of the user and their google plan. We don't know if they're paying. From my post: "Not when I pay rent to store my stuff on it." I wasn't talking about them, I was talking about my own relationship with Google, and my expectation that a vendor provides the service they promised to in exchange for my money. > Google has the right to remove whatever they want. Nope.
AlexandrB 4y ago
I haven't read their TOS, but there's almost certainly a clause about how the service comes with no warranty and you're storing your data at your own risk. So they're not obligated to do anything really. They could decide to replace all your files with RickRoll videos and I doubt you'd have grounds to sue.
- indymike 4y ago
  > but there's almost certainly a clause about how the service comes with no warranty and you're storing your data at your own risk You can disclaim liability all you want, but there comes a point where you are selling data storage, and not delivering what you sold. Also, believe it or not, contract can contain terms and exclusions that are illegal and will be set aside in a lawsuit. > So they're not obligated to do anything really. This is what everyone sued for fraud or breach of contract thinks before an expensive, long, slow education takes place.