backtop


Print 30 comment(s) - last by Etsp.. on Dec 28 at 10:02 PM

Consumer advocacy group calls for Google to adopt an easy zero day data retention "opt out" provision

One of the most controversial topics online is privacy.  On the one hand there are the advertisers and content providers (and those who do both) like Google.  They say that keeping user statistics is essential to offering more effective advertising, which in turn is key to generating more revenue and being able to provide users with more content.

However, to some users and consumer advocacy groups data retention, particularly by search engine giants like Yahoo and Google, represents a cohesive invasion of privacy that would not have been possible offline.  They say that the potential for abuse of information such as medical searches is too great and that search engines should cut down on their data retention and anonymize data.  Anonymous data would allow for slightly more effective ads than unresearched advertising, but it would be less effective than user targeted ads.  It’s a necessary loss, say some.

One consumer advocacy group is making waves by demanding the internet's largest information gatherer -- Google -- give users an easy way of opting out of data collection entirely.  Consumer Watchdog President Jamie Court and Policy Advocate John M. Simpson sent a letter to Google, asking that the company allow users a way to block Google from gathering information on users' search queries, IP addresses and cookies. 

In its most recent letter, addressed to Google CEO Eric Schmidt, Consumer Watchdog states, "We call on you to offer Google's users such a clearly identifiable "opt out" function on its search engine that is essentially a zero personal data retention policy."

Consumer Watchdog suggests that Google adopt an easy opt out similar to Ask.com's AskEraser.  It seems unlikely that Google would want to model itself after such a business, however.

Google arranged a meeting in October to try to sooth Consumer Watchdog, but since the pair's interactions have been rife with frustration.  Google implies (PDF) that the group does not understand how its Chrome browser's privacy functions and its Suggest feature work.  Consumer Watchdog has written another letter to Google (PDF) accusing it of misdirection and feigned innocence, saying that Google's letter "rebuts issues we have not raised and misstates our position."

The group has called for an after-Christmas meeting with Google.  However, given their past interaction, it seems unlikely that either party will get what they want this Christmas -- in Google's case Consumer Watch shutting up, and in Consumer Watch's case an opt out concession from Google.

Google currently has cut its data retention time to 9 months.  Yahoo recently one-upped Google by cutting its own data retention time to 3 months.

Yahoo, Google, and fellow rival Microsoft will likely face tough questions when the European Commission has a working party meeting in February on the topic of data retention.  The EC has called for, but not legislated a 6 month data retention period.  The governing body of Europe may look to force the search leaders' hands, which may in turn have a ripple effect on business in America and elsewhere.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Forrest for the trees
By uhgotnegum on 12/24/2008 11:04:00 AM , Rating: 2
I am not saying the article is "missing it," but this is one example of a growing concern in digitized, cloud, internet environments; where do Google's (or insert another name) right to offer its services on its terms begin to unreasonably (key word) interfere with my right to privacy and access to information, generally? Where is the proper balance?

If we accept the concept of a right to privacy, I think we're going to need to develop standards (do NOT read "standards" as "laws") specifically for the digital world, which provide clear and understandable boundaries for everyone to better understand what he/she is exposing.

Right now, all I see are EULA and other "check this box to agree to our terms" and the terms are the typical boilerplate legal language we apply to physical world agreements. I believe there is a fundamental difference between the physical world and the standards applied there and the digital world, where you don't necessarily "see" what's happening.

The concept is still a little muddled in my mind, but the digital world has characteristics that differ in a significant enough way from the physical world that we can't rely on an "apples to apples" application of the standards everyone applies in daily life.




"Paying an extra $500 for a computer in this environment -- same piece of hardware -- paying $500 more to get a logo on it? I think that's a more challenging proposition for the average person than it used to be." -- Steve Ballmer














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki