There’s been plenty of heated Internet debate today about a Google quote from a civil action suit surrounding its scanning of Gmail messages for targeted ads. It reads as follows:
“Just as a sender of a letter to a business colleague cannot be surprised that the recipient’s assistant opens the letter, people who use web-based email today cannot be surprised if their emails are processed by the recipient’s [email provider] in the course of delivery. Indeed, “a person has no legitimate expectation of privacy in information he voluntarily turns over to third parties.””
But let’s be clear, it is Google that is being disingenuous. Its comparison with the physical letter uses false logic – it is downright sophistry. For one, an assistant is not the same as an email provider. Unless, of course, your PA can scan letters, use algorithms implanted in their brain, pick out keywords and use them to decide which adverts to show their boss. And then, somehow, make themselves ludicrous sums of money doing all this. It’s bizarre reasoning. Maybe Google has crazy robotic assistants handling their mail, walking around with updating marketing placards, but no one else does.
Google then goes on to quote a case involving a telephone company tracking dialled numbers, from 1979, and in doing so only doubles the speciousness of its argument. Tracking numbers is not the same as scanning the actual content of emails to make money – which does in some way invade privacy, no matter how much you argue the other way.
Given that Google repeatedly claims it respects privacy, and then repeatedly undermines itself by doing stupid things (e.g. the Street View Wi-Spy debacle), I’m amazed the company can be as glib as it’s being. People do have a reasonable expectation of privacy and Google knows it. If they don’t get privacy with Google, they will go to others, even if most common email is vulnerable to snooping.
The stupidest thing is that Google doesn’t have to act like this. It could be, you know, transparent. I use Gmail. I don’t have a problem with Google scanning my emails. Sure, go ahead and show me adverts that I will never click on. As long as the service remains free I’m happy, and if I want to keep something secret over email I’ll use PGP. Or I’ll use some other form of communication with end-to-end encryption.
But why mislead people, Google? I, and many others, have a problem with that.
Are you a pedant on privacy issues? Try our quiz!
Tesla makes key advances toward advanced self-driving rollout in China as chief Elon Musk meets…
New UK rules bring in basic security requirements for millions of internet-connected devices, aiming to…
Google parent Alphabet sees market capitalisation surge over $2tn on plan to over first-ever cash…
Google asks Virginia federal court to dismiss case brought by US Justice Department and eight…
Snapchat parent Snap reports user growth, revenues in spite of tough competition, in what may…
Quick-growing fast-fashion company Shein must comply with most stringent level of EU digital rules after…
View Comments
there are deeply engaged bookworms working out sceems to manipulate whom they choose.
I liked your article MS
liked the article