4 ms·

This is completely misleading. The article actually says this: Plaintiffs in the case contend that Google's automated scanning of e-mail represents an ille

by sgentle 13y ago

This is completely misleading. The article actually says this: Plaintiffs in the case contend that Google's automated scanning of e-mail represents an illegal interception of their electronic communications without their consent. However, Google, which uses automated scanning to filter spam and deliver targeted advertising to its users, noted that plaintiffs consented to the practice in exchange for the e-mail services. Google goes on to say that courts have held that all e-mail users "necessarily give implied consent to the automated processing of their emails." This is the same old "algorithms reading my email is a violation of privacy" argument from back when Gmail started. Ignoring the bullshit headline, Google's argument comes down to the following: 1. Machines scanning your email doesn't violate privacy 2. Even if it did, you consent to it when you sign up for a Gmail account 3. It's impossible to provide email hosting without some level of automated processing of messages Google's clearly in the right here, and the various outlets reporting this story need to learn some journalistic ethics.

johnchristopher 13y ago
> 1. Machines scanning your email doesn't violate privacy Depends what the machine or the operator is doing with the result of that scan. > 2. Even if it did, you consent to it when you sign up for a Gmail account Gmail users consent to scan from Gmail but if google holds in court that consent is implied to the automated processing of emails then someone might think this content extends to any machine touching the mail on its trip to the recipient. Which is not the same as "scanning mail content to get useful keywords for better ads". I wonder if google is allowed to scan mails it has received but the user hasn't yet opened. It means google has access to the user's pen buddy mail without that pen buddy's consent. I agree consent from the user is given when he reads any mail that include or not his correspondent text But that correspondent might be using another mail provider and my point is that he hasn't given explicit consent to google to scan its mail... the one allowing that is the gmail user. What happens if I say to my correspondent "don't share this" and he opens the mail. Has he betrayed me by sharing that mail with google ? If google has indexed that mail content before I (the gmail user) had a chance to read it... did google violate my correspondent's privacy ? Is sending an email to a gmail address an implied consent to have mail read and indexed for ad targeting ? Excluding necessary and really automated non-profit machine analysis such as white listing, anti-spam, virus, domain verification, stp check, etc. Automated processing (for making sure it's delivered) of emails certainly doesn't imply scanning content to build a social graph and an ad profile.
- Oletros 13y ago
  > I wonder if google is allowed to scan mails it has received but the user hasn't yet opened Well, this is how anti spam filter works
  - johnchristopher 13y ago
    For spam, yes. But does it implicitly allow Google to scan for building a user profile of a gmail user ? And of a sender from a different service ? Why would google be allowed to build a johnchristopher@fastmail ad profile based on the mail sent to my gmail correspondents ? The analogy with snail mail is blurry because every snail mail exchange doesn't include the full transcript of the conversation.

by sgentle 13y ago

johnchristopher 13y ago

> 1. Machines scanning your email doesn't violate privacy Depends what the machine or the operator is doing with the result of that scan. > 2. Even if it did, you consent to it when you sign up for a Gmail account Gmail users consent to scan from Gmail but if google holds in court that consent is implied to the automated processing of emails then someone might think this content extends to any machine touching the mail on its trip to the recipient. Which is not the same as "scanning mail content to get useful keywords for better ads". I wonder if google is allowed to scan mails it has received but the user hasn't yet opened. It means google has access to the user's pen buddy mail without that pen buddy's consent. I agree consent from the user is given when he reads any mail that include or not his correspondent text But that correspondent might be using another mail provider and my point is that he hasn't given explicit consent to google to scan its mail... the one allowing that is the gmail user. What happens if I say to my correspondent "don't share this" and he opens the mail. Has he betrayed me by sharing that mail with google ? If google has indexed that mail content before I (the gmail user) had a chance to read it... did google violate my correspondent's privacy ? Is sending an email to a gmail address an implied consent to have mail read and indexed for ad targeting ? Excluding necessary and really automated non-profit machine analysis such as white listing, anti-spam, virus, domain verification, stp check, etc. Automated processing (for making sure it's delivered) of emails certainly doesn't imply scanning content to build a social graph and an ad profile.

Oletros 13y ago
> I wonder if google is allowed to scan mails it has received but the user hasn't yet opened Well, this is how anti spam filter works
- johnchristopher 13y ago
  For spam, yes. But does it implicitly allow Google to scan for building a user profile of a gmail user ? And of a sender from a different service ? Why would google be allowed to build a johnchristopher@fastmail ad profile based on the mail sent to my gmail correspondents ? The analogy with snail mail is blurry because every snail mail exchange doesn't include the full transcript of the conversation.