Uncle Sam Wants Your Google Searches (And Already Got Results From Others)
from the uh-oh dept
In a story that's about to wake up a lot of people to some fairly scary possibilities, the federal government has asked a judge to force Google to turn over search records that were subpoenaed. Google initially refused to do so. Google is defending its decision by saying that it's both a violation of the privacy of its users and that turning over the data would reveal trade secrets. The specifics of the case are a bit worrisome, because the government is specifically asking for the data to try to prove that the Child Online Protection Act (COPA) is necessary. We've discussed problems with that law in the past, and the Supreme Court agreed that it was problematic -- though, offered the government a chance to make its argument again. It's no surprise, actually, that they subpoenaed Google. After all, in the original defense before the Supreme Court, Solicitor General Theodore Olson tried to use the Google results count for "free porn" as proof of why the law was needed. As we noted at the time, the Justices saw through that argument immediately, pointing out that just because there are search results on that term, it doesn't mean they're all pornographic -- meaning such numbers don't prove much. However, it appears the government's lawyers have figured out that superficial evidence from Google isn't enough -- so they might as well get a lot more detailed info, in the form of one whole week's worth of search results. This is worrisome, in part, because by hiding this behind the "protecting kids from porn" argument will distract from the real issue, and could set a bad precedent. It's also worth noting that the government claims other search engines had no problem at all turning over similar data -- which may be the most worrying point. John Battelle points out how this could destroy the public's trust in search engines while Michael Bazely raises some additional issues about this government action, including comparing it to the new European data retention laws. As Bazely points out, this may not turn out to be the "watershed" case many are expecting concerning the privacy of our data -- but it's certainly going to shine a bright light on a lot of legal questions that have remained unanswered. Update: It's now been confirmed that Yahoo, MSN and AOL were all asked and complied, though it appears that some (such as Yahoo) simply gave search terms with no identification information. That's better than nothing, but it still does raise some questions about where the line would be drawn. Update 2: Tech Law Advisor has posted a copy of the subpoena.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
here we go again
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: here we go again
Propose modifying it to "free J. Edgar in a dress porn"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: here we go again
But for the sake of your own sanity, please don't do a Google Image Search for those terms...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: here we go again
http://images.google.com/images?q=free%20J.%20Edgar%20in%20a%20dress%20porn&sa=N&tab=wi
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: here we go again
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
fairly scary?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: fairly scary?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: fairly scary?
It's like saying the wheels on my car are ignoring the brakes when in reality the brakes are just weak/broken.
It's like trying to make a magnetic trap, the forces of democracy (or rather, "mob politics") are so unstable that no stable system can be created until the will of the people reign bounded by a commitment to freedom.
So I don't get excited about government invasion of freedoms and privacy because I have accepted that the current system is almost powerless to stop the inevitable. If you want to avoid this impeding doom, don't try to protect the impotent constitution but instead strengthen its protections of our freedoms and equality (see True Democracy [currently in Yahoo Groups]).
Andy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: fairly scary?
The first sensible post I've seen...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: fairly scary?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: fairly scary?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: fairly scary?
Who voted this administration in? TWICE. Europeans?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: fairly scary?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: fairly scary?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: fairly scary?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The privacy issue...
Let's take these one by one:
It's obvious that Google needs to tread lightly here. They are correct in that they are not a party to the suit and shouldn't be compelled to provide such information. In addition, Google is under no contractual obligation to atually keep records of every search performed. Whether they do or not is their own business. I think it would be the government's responsibility to first prove that such records actually exist! Of course, that would require a discovery motion by the government against Google, in which the judge would probably (hopefully!) reject, since this would be considered immaterial to the actual case.
Kind of makes me glad that the government isn't running its own "google"-style search engine; very detailed information could have been provided without any knowledge of anybody.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The privacy issue...
They look at these one million IP addresses, and decide that to prove their case, they need to study how many of these IP addresses are assigned to houses with kids in them.
Then, by some chance, the govt. is knocking on my door, because, currently, my IP address that I have is assigned to my cable modem, but the previous user of that same address enjoyed wacking off every now and then while sitting at his computer.
Or maybe they end up at the door of some unsuspecting family, who's girl is getting ready for prom, but since she is poor, she was online looking for free prom dresses, but accidently typed free porn and hit enter (silly, yes, but watch IRC chat for 15 minutes one day and you may come to realize that it really could happen, and frequently).
This is a very bad idea.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The privacy issue...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Free Porn, Free Porn!
Free Mandela, free mandela!
Everybody write 'Free Porn' in their messages on Tech Dirt, then spam Google so that the first thing that shows up is our smart asses.
Yea!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Free Porn, Free Porn!
And what about porn that isn't free? Why are they only collecting data on free porn? I'm sure most porn is non-free porn. Then again, I suppose that non-free porn still uses the term "free porn" enough to show up in a google search.
Now what about the free pr0n problem? :-)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Free Porn, Free Porn!
No, it's:
Free Tibet!*
*With purchase of equal size country...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Free Porn, Free Porn!
he he
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
Can't the Government just sit around and watch Dog Pile's Search Spy for a week and get what they need?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Logging users search terms?
If I created a search engine site, I would NOT log anything if I cared at all about privacy concerns.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Logging users search terms?
They use it for analysis on refining algorthims, even rating sites, and now they are using it for the personalized search. (which means they have data tying the searches to your google account)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Logging users search terms?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
deep breath
I believe Google is right in fighting the release, but I also don't blame the government for trying to get it if they feel it will help them prove their case. I'm sure Google will probably win in the end, based on government's general lack of tech-understanding.
This isn't the first time the govt has gone to court trying to obtain private info. And it didn't all start with President Bush as many would like us to believe.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: deep breath
A lot of conservatives don't believe in a "right to privacy" and are therefore attempting to change interpretation of the laws in order to set such a precedent. You might be right if these were private lawyers, but everytime *government* lawyers ask for such information, they are attacking *your* constitutional rights.
Further, it's foolish to believe that governmental branches act independently of each other and that each invasion of rights is unique. Clearly, the President doesn't believe he is beholden to the law. Clearly, his willingness to violate individual privacy creates an atmosphere whereby other conservatives seek to do the same.
Wake up!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Let's search them...
I'm sick of articles saying "the government" is doing this. Like the government is somehow an entity outside of "We the People". The government is made up of individuals, and we need to point out who (first & last name) are doing these things.
Just a thought...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Let's search them...
Yes, our government actually works outside of "We the people", the United Nations, and every imaginable pact that threatens our nuclear weapons and oil supply. It's a known fact that people gladly give their right to governments when they feel threatened and slowly the government starts to take over the people. After all it's all about power.
By the way, check this quotation said by a Nazi at Nuremberg trials and think about it for a while.
"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."
-- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Let's search them...for the magic markers they've
"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."
-- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials
DIRECTIONS:
1) Massage violently into scalp. Let absorb for 10 minutes.
2) Rinse, and repeat the 1st ammendment.
3) Repeat step 1 until you begin to believe in the 1st, 4th, and 5th ammendment and you begin to feel a burning sensation upon the scalp.
"Hector" makes an excellent point concerning history repeating itself. It can, and it will, unless the intelligencia of a society can somehow illustrate to the public how and why their
"Bill of Rights" has been set aflame.
Its time to start kicking fellow Americans who are sleeping through this slow but sure erosion of the right to free speach, and protection from unreasonable search and seizure (yes this applies to data just as much as it does to a Watergate paper folder.)
The true patriots are those who are constantly questioning government, not those who when told to jump ask "How High?"
What befuddles me is that everyone with any knowledge seems to object to these abuses, and we all seem to agree, yet nothing seems to change...
It seems that we no longer value intelligence and rational decision-making in our leaders, and gravitate towards those who pull off the best act in maing us afraid of something external, real or imaginary.
This is very bad; our (USA) increasing Xenophobic tendendancies, increasing fear sythesised by our government, our tendency to sacrifice personal privacy in exchange for an "illusion of control" or safety, the list goes on and on.
HAVEN'T WE SEEN THIS BEFORE, SAY ABOUT 75 SOME YEARS AGO?
One cannot help but see the analogy, as reactive as it may sound.....
The Professor HighBrow does not like telling kids fairy tales in science class...he'd rather have you build a baking soda 'n vinager volcano or a mouse-wheel powered generator. No more magic markers for you kids until you stop trying to sniff them.
--Professor HighBrow
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Let's search them...for the magic markers the
'Where IS my anti-depressant? What DID I do with my last joint? Those 'relaxation' pills the doctor gave me are finally kicking in. Only 12 and depressed/hyper? We have something for that!
This is the land of the 'dumbing of america'. 'Stoned' (and helpless).
How many of you are aware of how many times The Board of Regents has LOWERED the Standards of Education? Look into it...it's shocking! and...can you guess what that means to a society?...to a country and it's people?
...and that's just one little example of what americans know nothing about...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Let's search them...for the magic markers the
I know the NY board of Regents raised the standards in order to improve education. Unfortunately the 'shit po ghetto folk and the piss po PWT' bitched and it got lowered because the parents refuse to actually contribute to a meaningful education. Why do that when it is easier to play retarded and fill out public assistance forms(or have a literate friend do it for them). I'm sick and tired of hearing people complain that it is societies fault thay are in a self imposed poverty. your choices have consequences. If you cannot live with that, then do us all a favor... Don't have kids, Don't get assistance, Die quickly so we can all move on to the utopia that awaits those of us that are punished for doing the right thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Let's search them...
"Ye reap what ye sow!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Let's search them...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What exactly is Google asked to turn over?
If it's just the number of times some search was requested, what's the big deal? It's not like they are asking for names and addresses of people, or even IP addresses.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What exactly is Google asked to turn over?
This is one staunch conservative who is really nervous over this one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
D;
It isn't the government's responcability to keep kids from whacking off, rather the parents no?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
America & Sex
Now for the serious: IF your kid is looking at porn, then don't go around blaming the government about not protecting your child from such graphic material. Do your goddamn job as a parent and call your ISP about how to filter the content on your connection! And then talk to your kid about sex. If you don't do it soon, he's gonna find some slut at school, knock her up, and come home one day with syphilis. Then you're going to shake your head and wonder how this could have happened, he'll hate you forever, probably drop out of highschool, hopefully never talk to you again because you deserve it, and then pop up on the evening news 3 years later as part of a triple homicide and bank heist.
THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT YOUR THIRD PARENT.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: America & Sex
1. a city can be much more easily influenced by the local voters; and
2. It's not that hard to move to a nearby city or live just outside the city in most places to avoid paying taxes to the government body that you disagree with.
As for the responsibility of the parents, I am a parent and I agree with everything that Stoned4Life says.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: America & Sex
THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT YOUR THIRD PARENT.
AMEN.
We need "THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT YOUR THIRD PARENT." Bumper stickers!!!
The thing is the govt. is only asking for one search term... what about the kid who does an image search for "naked women" or "breast" or any number of infinate words from the english language (or spanish we do have a rising illegal population, can't forget their kids too) that will produce similar results.
Bottom line. If you have a kid, be a damn parent. It's not a teacher/policeman/fireman/doctor/congressmen/etc. responsibilty to raise YOUR CHILD.
It doesn't take a village to raise a child, just a parent that gives a shit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: America & Sex
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Had to do it...
Your search - free J. Edgar in a dress porn - did not match any documents.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
E-Nation
"Free J. Edgar's Pornographic Prom Dress"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
For Dam...Re: No Subject Given
As for 'WINGS'...need both to fly!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Standards
The problem is, every individual in America differs on what "justice" is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Standards
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
I'm interested in this too. I'm a Canadian citizen, and I use Google quite a bit... while not concerned that anything I use it for is illegal by my country's standards, I -am- concerned about the American governement invading my privacy in the manner that the article describes. I mean, it's technically legal for me to download MP3s for my private use up here... are they going to try and sic the RIAA on my ass anyways?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
As for the ability of the government to do this? Clearly it doesn't have that right - but as Nixon's floating head said it best, "I'll go somewhere the US Constitution dosn't mean didly-poop: the Supreme Court!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What happened to freedom.
If the govt. thinks it is allowed to just step on the First ammendment then I would as a corporation refuse this request even if the Judge ordered it. I mean can they really hold all the Chairmen/women of the Board in contempt if they all vote no to this. That would be like saying "There is no Democracy. I am Bush. I run Republic you are my slaves do as I say.
The govt. has no right meddling in Google's affairs and better watch out before they lose more companies to China like IBM.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What happened to freedom.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What happened to freedom.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What happened to freedom.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What happened to freedom.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What happened to freedom.
I do feel that certain content should be have their own extensions, but that is the only regulation I think there should be. ie .com, .biz, .xxx, etc.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What happened to freedom.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What happened to freedom.
You got that part right!!! :"(
Unfortunately, it's really always been that way. Americans have had their heads in their 'ball games' too long, so they never noticed.
PS...I'm an american, in case you wondered (no caps out of disrespect). Yes...born here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Less smut
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Government request for porn searches on google
Same with your releasing porn search info to the government. If it protects kids, it is a no brainer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Government request for porn searches on google
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Government request for porn searches on google
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Government request for porn searches on google
A 'stoned-out' nation serves their purposes!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Government request for porn searches on google
-----------------------
Your driving down the road in your semi when a van full of children, driven by a not so bright person pulls out in front of you. You have the right of way, not them. Do you exorcise your right of way and hit the van, hurt a bunch of kids and collect the insurance lotto, or do their rights to safety and life superceed your right of way? Looks like a no brainer to me.
-----------------------
Sounds to me like the "no-brainer" is attached to the poster's neck. Maybe Jamison needs to "exorcise" the demons some other way, rather than exercising the right to personal privacy and PERSONAL ACCOUNTABILITY. It is thoroughly disapointing that parents call upon society to protect their kids from the real world
(which is unfortunately dangerous and malicious at times) rather than taking responsibility themselves!
How much sense does your metaphor make?
You are comparing killing a van full of children to the right to personal privacy? That is absurd, almost offensive. Some very good points have been made....
THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT YOUR THIRD PARENT
or something to that effect. 'Tis a slippery slope you're on when you compare the death of a child to freedom of expression and privacy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fear
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Fear
THIS IS THE KEY TO THE MATTER!
IT MAY BE ALBERTOS INTENTION. I THINK HE KNOWS HE CAN'T BEAT THE ACLU ON THIS.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Google
Now that the cat's out of the bag, I believe it would not bode well for Google should they decide to give in. Their business is built upon a platform of public trust; destroy that trust and you destroy the business. Most people don't take well to being spied upon, especially Americans. They resent it, and will take their searches, and their business, elsewhere.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
google should move HQ and all operations abroad
what is the best non-US based search engine now? i'm switching to non-US based search engine now out of protest.
-Milly from the UK
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Woah Nelly
So, technically, everyone's practically saying:
"Don't let the government intervene in individual [pornographic] affairs, but when it comes to children, let their parents take authority over it"?
If so, I completely agree. The government is NOT THE THIRD PARENT of a family. Last time I checked, government was here to stabalize America's community, not control every aspect of it (meaning privacy).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
snatched again
Question I ask is why do the American people put up with this gross injustice?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
snatched again
Question I ask is why do the American people put up with this gross injustice?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]