> Being common doesn't mean it isn't problematic, though. Certainly. However, taking a common business/law(?) issue and making it a Google issue is lame. EDIT

> Being common doesn't mean it isn't problematic, though. Certainly. However, taking a common business/law(?) issue and making it a Google issue is lame. EDIT: > That sounds like a distinction without a difference to me. > If I (the first party) have given data to a company (the second party), and that company is sold to someone else (the third party), then my data was sold to a third party. Well. I can see where you are coming from, but we have to be able to differentiate between a) an ongoing 1p<->2p relationship, where 2p is selling data to a 3p b) a relationship, where the entire 2p gets replaced These two setups are clearly not equal. There is a distinction. And a difference.