You are here

Privacy

Are Google Glass’ Recordings Illegal Wiretapping Too? -- Part 19 Google Spying Series

Google Glass’ easy eavesdropping on people may be illegal wiretapping.

Two courts already have ruled in different class actions that Google can be sued for illegal wiretapping for “interceptions” of personal information without meaningful consent -- in circumstances analogous to how Google Glass operates.

First, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled that wiretap law prohibits the type of transmission “interception” that Google StreetView cars’ did in secretly collecting personal information from unencrypted home WiFi networks.

Rebutting Mr. Ammori’s “Blame the NSA not Google” USA Today Op-ed

Mr. Ammori, one of Google’s and Free Culture’s most able defenders, comes to the public defense of Google in his recent USA Today op-edBlame the NSA not Facebook & Google.”

He publicly castigates privacy advocates for doing their jobs, stating: “blaming tech companies for the NSA’s overreach isn’t just ignorant, but dangerous.”

As most understand, ad hominem attacks are the refuge of those who know the facts are not on their side.  

Nevertheless Mr. Ammori does us all a favor for elevating the important public question of whether or not Google, in particular, deserves any blame for its significant role in the NSA spy scandals.

First, let’s address whether it is “ignorant” to blame Google for complicity in NSA spying. Consider the following facts.

The De-Americanization of the Internet – My Daily Caller Op-ed

Please don’t miss my latest Daily Caller op-ed: “The De-Americanization of the Internet” -- here.  

America's dominance of the Internet has peaked. Read why and what it means. 

  • It is Part 3 of my “World Changing Internet” research series.

World Changing Internet Series

Part 1: Seven Ways the World is Changing the Internet

Part 2: Twitter’s Realpolitik & the Sovereign-ization of the Internet

 

Google-YouAd is a Deceptive and Unfair Business Practice – Part 29 Google Unaccountability Series

Google represents its new default policy -- taking a user’s name and picture and putting it in their ads without permission or compensation -- as “Shared Endorsements.”  This deceptive and unfair business practice is more aptly named Google-YouAd, “Pirated Endorsements,” or “Swindled Endorsements,” because they are taken deceptively without permission or compensation.

To Google, people apparently are just another form of digital content that should be open and free to exploit without asking the owner for permission and without any expectation of payment from Google for the value that Google generates from the taken content.

We should not be surprised. Google is treating their users, not as humans with privacy and ownership rights, but as inanimate products, content, and “targets” of their advertising model. Notice that they are treating people’s unique identities just like they treat others valuable content that is trademarked, copyrighted, patented, private, confidential or secret. Simply they take it without permission or compensation until an authority that they fear compels them to cease and desist.

Questions for Google’s Privacy Policy Counsel at Cato’s NSA Surveillance Conference – Part 16 Google Spying Series

Given that Google’s Privacy Policy Counsel, David Lieber, is the only corporate representative speaking at Cato’s impressive conference tomorrow in D.C. on: NSA Surveillance: What We Know and What to Do about It, let me suggest some questions to ask Mr. Lieber about Google’s views on surveillance and spying in general. 

Special Report: Google on Piracy: Not Telling the Whole Truth and Nothing but the Truth – Part 16 Google’s Disrespect for Property Series

Google’s recent “Report: How Google Fights Piracy,” begs cross-examination, for the same reason courts and Congress employ the tool of cross examination and the process of adversarial hearings to get to the real truth. 

We all are familiar with the legal oath: “Do you solemnly swear that you will tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God?”

Congress: Restore Our Rightful Privacy Ownership – My Daily Caller Op-ed – Part 2 of Privacy Theft Series

Please don’t miss my latest op-ed: “Congress: Restore Our Rightful Privacy Ownership” – here.

It makes the case that privacy is a form of property under the Constitution and that Congress must step up and legislate in order to restore Americans’ reasonable expectation of privacy online -- regardless of what technology is involved.

Own your privacy.

 

Privacy Theft Series

Video: Why Google’s WiSpy Wiretapping is Now Class Action Catnip – Part 36 Google’s Disrespect for Privacy Series

Last week a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel unanimously ruled that Google’s recording of peoples’ home WiFi signals without their knowledge or permission is indeed wiretapping.

For those interested in the implications of this ruling, please see a five minute video -- here -- where I explain what Google did; why the Ninth Circuit ruling is so significant and ominous for Google; why Google’s public story of how this happened is preposterous; and why it is now class action lawsuit catnip.

Thanks and kudos to Mike Wendy of Media Freedom for his video interview.

Google's Disrespect for Privacy Series

Part 1: Why Google is the Biggest Threat to Americans' Privacy; House Testimony [7-18-08]

FYI – New Online Research Library of Precursor’s Top Research Series

Please find the new Precursor online Research Library -- here -- which will be kept up-to-date going forward.

  • It presently catalogues links to ~270 pieces of Precursor research in ~20 ongoing research series.

This should make it much easier to scan and find particular research of interest by subject and theme.

  • An outline of subjects and themes are below.

Thank you.

Scott Cleland

Precursor LLCProven Thought Leadership

 

Pages

Q&A One Pager Debunking Net Neutrality Myths