French Officials Say EU Will Sanction Google Over Privacy 161
taz346 writes "French officials said on Monday that the EU intends to sanction Google after the Internet search giant failed to respond to concerns about its privacy policy. 'At the end of a four-month delay accorded to Google to comply with the European data protection directive and to implement effectively (our) recommendations, no answer has been given,' said France's CNIL data protection agency. Google's new policy, implemented in March 2012, allows it to track users over multiple sites. Users who sign in to Google services cannot opt out. CNIL said a working group would meet next week to begin work on 'coercive actions which should be implemented before the summer' against Google."
Damn nanny government (Score:3, Insightful)
Trying to protect its citizens' privacy!
strange (Score:3, Insightful)
Google has a large legal team, so I assume not responding is deliberate, rather than because they forgot or just couldn't think of what to respond with.
Re:strange (Score:5, Insightful)
Not saying that nothing should be done on the issue, but it won't work at such a small scale.
EU should really get their priorities straight (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Fuck yeah (Score:4, Insightful)
If you have a trouble with how Google tracks you, why would you object to the suggestion that you not use Google?
Oh wait, wanting stuff for free is the thing I'd expect a European to say.
See what I did there?
Re:Yes, please (Score:5, Insightful)
This is perhaps the single most stupid thing I've read on this topic. You admit to being an avid user of Google's services, yet you object to the "price" that they offer those services for. When you go to the grocery store, if you don't like the price of milk, do you demand that the government make the store give it to you for free?
Don't want to agree to Google's terms of use? I have a perfect solution for you - use somebody else's services.
Oh, and you're on the internet. Good luck with that fantasy of keeping your data under your absolute control...
Re:Fuck yeah (Score:4, Insightful)
Visiting almost any site on the web means you are using Google. Google Analytics, Ads, and blogging platforms... This isn't some optional service that you can simply choose not to use, like Dropbox or MS Office.
Your argument is, practically speaking, like saying, "don't like lead pollution in the air from gasoline? just don't breath in the lead particles."
Ridiculous (Score:4, Insightful)
No one is forced to use Google. If you don't want them to do things with your data, don't give it to them.
Re:Damn nanny government (Score:4, Insightful)
As per multiple other comments, you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. But don't let your ignorance of international law get in the way of your pronouncements on the matter...
Again, since apparently you missed the first three or four times: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizenship_of_the_European_Union [wikipedia.org]
Re:Fuck yeah (Score:4, Insightful)
Especially when said corporations are not European and not government. France has no problem amassing ridiculous amounts of data (of questionable quality) to use against their own citizens, here is a list [wikipedia.org] (only available in French unfortunately).
Said differently: when your government does something that has a positive impact for you, it doesn't mean it's doing it for you. A pessimist would argue that there likely is a higher interest at stake.
Re:Damn nanny government (Score:4, Insightful)
If I call you my subject will you accept me as king? Would it be alright if others did business with me as if I were your king even if you don't accept me as such?
You've been called off and shown to be wrong, so instead you double down. And triple down. And continue to find excuses to make it appear as if you were right. People like you are responsible for every single thing that human beings do wrong. Literally every stupid or malevolent decision made by any human can be traced back to the feeling of superiority to everyone else you're demonstrating and/or a complete disregard for any evidence given to the contrary of your beliefs, which you're also demonstrating in abundance. Take a step to become a better man today, read what I have to say below and admit you're fucking wrong.
The European Union is pretty much like the United States. We're all citizens of our individual states. I'm a citizen of South Carolina, for example. The states formed an union. As a result, I'm also a citizen of the United States.
The European Union is a governing body. It has a parliament elected by its citizens through a form of proportional representation to be decided by the member states. It has a common currency. Members of different member states can move and work in any other member state...passports issued by member nations of the European Union have the words "European Union" written in the cover.
The European Union has citizens, they're properly represented, and you're an idiot.
Re:LOzzz!!! (Score:4, Insightful)
Issue is that privacy laws are set based on two things:
1. Cultural expectations of privacy in the region.
2. Attempts at circumventing aforementioned expectations for various reasons such as profit.
Issue is that nothing like google existed when current laws were drafted. It does now and it's in a clear and direct opposition with 1. in EU. This means that privacy watchdogs will either have to find applicable laws that will be interpreted in a way that fits 1. and goes against what google does (and many laws in these areas are often drafted specifically to allow for this by executive organs without forcing legislation changes) or they will push new legislation to specifically outlaw what google is currently doing.
The conflict was pretty obvious even with old google services, but it was viewed as a tolerable one. When google unified its services, pretty much every privacy watchdog across the continent red flagged the changes and made inquiries to google as to what it intends to do to resolve this conflict. Google did the (apparently) stupid thing by going with "we're too big to care, fuck off" answer of "we're withing the scope of law". A really stupid answer when you're talking to organisations that have power to both interpret laws as well as wield heavy influence in legislative process through being specialists in their respective field that is essentially consulted and relied upon to maintain privacy rules.
I don't see a good outcome for google unless they intend to spend a lot of effort lobbying hard. Considering that I doubt stupidity being the thing behind decision here, as there are plenty of smart people at google, it's likely that google is hoping to push for paradigm shift and is going all-in.
This obviously means that if it loses, it stands to lose a lot.
Re: Damn nanny government (Score:5, Insightful)