With Google already trying to contain the damage to its reputation 
from the National Security Agency (NSA) leaks, it now risks another dent
 to its image, as European privacy officials threaten to fine the 
company for sucking up vast amounts of user information without 
explaining the purpose.
On Thursday, French officials gave Google three months to explain how
 long it stores the information it gathers through Gmail, YouTube and 
other services, and to explain why it is collecting it. If Google fails 
to comply, which looks possible, it could face fines in France of up to 
about $400,000. “We realized that they are collecting a huge amount of 
data on each of us, and most people know nothing about this,” Isabelle 
Falque-Pierrotin, president of France’s National Commission on Computing
 and Freedom, told TIME on Thursday. “It is time for action.”
Of course, the fines alone are unlikely to work: they are a piddling 
amount for Google, whose market cap is close to $300 billion; it earned 
about $14 billion in the first quarter of this year, much of it from 
targeted ads through collecting user data. On Thursday, a British 
privacy activist Nick Pickles told the Associated Press
 that he worried that the fines “won’t be a particularly strong 
deterrent, that Google may see it as the price of doing business.”
Still, the fines in Europe could begin to add up, if each of the 
E.U.’s 27 members follow France’s lead. The French decision on Thursday 
was part of a joint action with Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Britain
 and Spain, all of which have said they too are weighing whether to fine
 Google. The penalties could also increase, if the E.U.’s privacy 
commissioner Viviane Reding succeeds in pushing through an increase in 
maximum fines on tech companies, from a maximum of about $800,000 to 2% 
of global sales.
The E.U.’s case against Google began when the company rolled out its 
new privacy policy in February last year, which put all 60 or so Google 
services, including Gmail, contacts, calendar and YouTube, under one 
joint statement of terms, paving the way to sharing user data between 
different sites. Google has touted the change as being a good thing for 
users, since it was simpler for people to understand. But in Europe, 
where privacy is tightly controlled, the change quickly raised 
suspicions that the company was intruding on people’s lives without them
 being aware of it. Google insists it consulted E.U. officials long 
before the policy rolled out. “Our privacy policy respects European 
law,” Al Verney, Google spokesman in Brussels, said in a statement on 
Thursday. “We have engaged fully with the authorities throughout this 
process, and we will continue to do so going forward.”
The true potential damage is to Google’s reputation, however. 
Although the timing is coincidental — the E.U. countries last October 
gave Google four months to respond — France’s decision comes just 10 
days after NSA contractor Edward Snowden blew the whistle on the 
agency’s Prism program. 
Snowden revealed that the government had access 
to mountains of user data from tech companies, Google among them, and 
sent the industry scrambling to show how the government had compelled it reluctantly to turn over data.
Clearly, the case against Google’s privacy policies is an unrelated 
issue. But coming so soon after Snowden’s leaked information, it could 
add to doubts people have about how private their online lives are. In 
Europe, the NSA leak has been explosive news, and to many, it has shown 
the U.S. tech giants having far too great a power over Europeans’ lives.
 “We didn’t imagine the Prism events, but the whole environment now is 
putting more pressure on actors like Google,” says Falque-Pierrotin. In 
pursuing her case, she said she became increasingly aware that while 
U.S. tech companies should be free to do commerce, the real problem was 
how opaque their data collection was. “We say, ‘Your ambition is to be 
the hub of our digital life, fine, that’s your business,’” she says. 
“But the market needs transparency and trust.”
Sources : Time
 
 
 
No comments:
Post a Comment