4 ms·

€150,000 is a drop in Google's ocean. Better would be to fine any public company a percentage of their market cap or something comparative that matches the fin

by junto 13y ago

€150,000 is a drop in Google's ocean. Better would be to fine any public company a percentage of their market cap or something comparative that matches the fine to the size of the company. That would provide a true penalty that discourages large multi-nationals from abusing local laws.

Gmo 13y ago
They did with what they had available as a tool : By law, they can't fine more than 150 000 euros ... I agree (and I'm pretty sure the CNIL agrees) it's not enough.
greenyoda 13y ago
In US dollars, roughly $200,000. This action probably cost the French government more in bureaucrats' salaries than it got from Google. If the fines are this small, it's pretty clear that the legislators who passed this law were not interested in creating a serious deterrent.
- atmosx 13y ago
  It's possible that they didn't knew what they were after... Also we should not underestimate the power of stupidity, in all ranks of society.
  - JohnTHaller 13y ago
    They implemented a 'cookie directive' where websites are supposed to ask permission to set cookies. They not only didn't know what they were after, they had no idea how to get there or where they were starting.
moomin 13y ago
You could charge Google that a day and they wouldn't care.
chestnut-tree 13y ago
"€150,000 is a drop in Google's ocean" An even more useless measure against Google was made earlier last year (2013) by the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) in the UK (a data privacy body). Google, having wrongly collected wi-fi data during its Street View activities, was asked to delete the private data it had collected. It failed to do so, prompting the ICO to give them additional days to comply with deletion but no fine. [1] Google probably have an entire department of corporate lawyers zealously protecting their interests, yet despite being instructed by an official body to delete private data, they "accidentally" retained the discs containing the additional private data. These are not the actions of a compnay that takes privacy seriously. And that is unlikely to change until official authorities sufficiently hold Google to account for their privacy transgressions. [1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23002166 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23002166
praptak 13y ago
> percentage of their market cap or something comparative The income from the local market comes to mind, as this is realistically the piece of the cake that the local government has some control over.
olivier1664 13y ago
For me, Google loses a part of its "Don't be evil" image by being sanctioned by the CNIL. As a French, I see the CNIL as some kind of Superman of the citizens rights. When Superman fight against someone, this someone is probably evil.
M2Ys4U 13y ago
That's what the upcoming EU Data Protection Regulation states. I believe it's around 8% of global profits. It's cleared the European Parliament and is currently being stymied in the Council (the body made up of ministers from EU member states)

by junto 13y ago

Gmo 13y ago

They did with what they had available as a tool : By law, they can't fine more than 150 000 euros ... I agree (and I'm pretty sure the CNIL agrees) it's not enough.

greenyoda 13y ago

In US dollars, roughly $200,000. This action probably cost the French government more in bureaucrats' salaries than it got from Google. If the fines are this small, it's pretty clear that the legislators who passed this law were not interested in creating a serious deterrent.

atmosx 13y ago
It's possible that they didn't knew what they were after... Also we should not underestimate the power of stupidity, in all ranks of society.
- JohnTHaller 13y ago
  They implemented a 'cookie directive' where websites are supposed to ask permission to set cookies. They not only didn't know what they were after, they had no idea how to get there or where they were starting.

moomin 13y ago

You could charge Google that a day and they wouldn't care.

chestnut-tree 13y ago

"€150,000 is a drop in Google's ocean" An even more useless measure against Google was made earlier last year (2013) by the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) in the UK (a data privacy body). Google, having wrongly collected wi-fi data during its Street View activities, was asked to delete the private data it had collected. It failed to do so, prompting the ICO to give them additional days to comply with deletion but no fine. [1] Google probably have an entire department of corporate lawyers zealously protecting their interests, yet despite being instructed by an official body to delete private data, they "accidentally" retained the discs containing the additional private data. These are not the actions of a compnay that takes privacy seriously. And that is unlikely to change until official authorities sufficiently hold Google to account for their privacy transgressions. [1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23002166 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23002166

praptak 13y ago

> percentage of their market cap or something comparative The income from the local market comes to mind, as this is realistically the piece of the cake that the local government has some control over.

olivier1664 13y ago

For me, Google loses a part of its "Don't be evil" image by being sanctioned by the CNIL. As a French, I see the CNIL as some kind of Superman of the citizens rights. When Superman fight against someone, this someone is probably evil.

M2Ys4U 13y ago

That's what the upcoming EU Data Protection Regulation states. I believe it's around 8% of global profits. It's cleared the European Parliament and is currently being stymied in the Council (the body made up of ministers from EU member states)