It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: Google Defies Data Demands of US

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 20 2006 @ 07:51 AM
link   
In the follow up to demands from the US Department of Justice (DoJ) for a weeks worth of search query data, Google has submitted a formal letter of rejection. Google said that in addition to violating it's users privacy and revealing it's trade secrets to rivals, handing the data over would not help the government achieve it's stated objective.
 



news.bbc.co.uk
Google has formally rejected a demand from the US government to hand over a week's worth of search records.

The rejection was made in court documents Google filed in response to official demands for search data.

In the strongly-worded papers Google said the request would violate the privacy of its users and reveal trade secrets to its rivals.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Google has come under criticism because of it's decision to censor search results in China. However one must realise that Google is just like any other business, and therefore subject to local laws.

The US DoJ request is a violation of privacy laws and it is unclear how compliance would help it achieve it's objectives. Google's fight against this erosion of civil liberties should represent not only the company's fight against government overreaching, but also that of the public.

Related News Links:
news.bbc.co.uk




posted on Feb, 20 2006 @ 10:29 AM
link   
*kudos to Google*

I had sort of lost a lot of faith in Google after their decisions in China, but this brings my spirits way back up. If the big guys stand up to the illegal and immoral bullying of the government, it shouldn't be long before everyone else does the same.

Again, kudos to Google; they've done the right thing.



posted on Feb, 20 2006 @ 12:08 PM
link   
Google isn't standing up to the US gov't on principle. Its doing so because it is economically feasible for it to do this. Opposing the chinese government in china isn't economically feasible, and thus it capitulates to any demands.
Don't bother looking to corporations for morality or ethics, they are governed, and this is the way it should be for corporations anyway, by economy and market.



posted on Feb, 20 2006 @ 12:15 PM
link   
Yeah Google!

I lost all hope in google, and I was looking for a replacement. This decision by google is the best decision they have made so far. Way to stick it to the man google.



posted on Feb, 20 2006 @ 01:49 PM
link   
Good. These blanket sweeps for information are intrusive, and most probably illegal too. I seem to recall Attn. Gen. John asscrack tried that with data from abortion clinics and I am not sure but I think the courts shot him down. Just like they did with the Oregon right to die law. The Republicians make such a big deal about how they are the party that stands up for individual rights and seems like they are the first ones to stick their noses right into it as well.



posted on Feb, 20 2006 @ 03:47 PM
link   
at best, this action is only a hollow victory
and the Gov't turning tail just leads me to believe this was a
'managed confrontation'...to give the masses a false trust & confidence

check out www.applefritter.com...
begins with : Data Mining 101:_________
they use Amazon as the experiment site in this actual case

which examples how one (be it a citizen or a IntelAgency)
can or could have even 'Google' surrender datamined info fromtheir own servers & without their knowledge or permission....

imo, this could be a stunt &/or a level of 'dis-info', rather than the popular image of 'sticking-it-to-the-man'.......................i remain dispassionate



posted on Feb, 20 2006 @ 04:57 PM
link   

I lost all hope in google, and I was looking for a replacement. This decision by google is the best decision they have made so far. Way to stick it to the man google.


And that's exactly why they did it. As Nygdan said, this was an economical move, not one on principle. If it were based on principle, Google never would have censored its searches for China.



posted on Feb, 21 2006 @ 07:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake
And that's exactly why they did it. As Nygdan said, this was an economical move, not one on principle. If it were based on principle, Google never would have censored its searches for China.


Would you rather no searches? Don't you think a little information is better than none? That is how the wars of the future are going to be wages, with ideas. We are already learning the futility of ground combat in the countries we recently occupied, and how we are loosing the war of ideology (look at the recent elections in Palestine and Iraq). Wouldn't you rather have have a Bible with every other page, than no pages at all?

I know your not doing this JJ, but I have seen some people turn this into a "If you don't support Bush, you support the Commies!"

We've had almost eight years of that, I thought that people were tired of the "with us or against us" mentality.



posted on Feb, 21 2006 @ 07:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
Google isn't standing up to the US gov't on principle. Its doing so because it is economically feasible for it to do this. Opposing the chinese government in china isn't economically feasible, and thus it capitulates to any demands.
Don't bother looking to corporations for morality or ethics, they are governed, and this is the way it should be for corporations anyway, by economy and market.


thats right on. this is only because this is in google's best ECONOMIC interests.



posted on Feb, 21 2006 @ 03:13 PM
link   
I'm proud of google for this stand. Telling the US government with a firm resounding NO is just what we as the people need to start doing. We can't just allow our leaders to trounce all over our rights and use their powers to their hearts content.

Right on google.



posted on Feb, 21 2006 @ 03:42 PM
link   
curme, do you think Google is doing this on principle and not for economic reasons? If so, why?




top topics



 
7

log in

join