
Electronic Privacy Information centre (EPIC) has filed suit in D.C district court alleging that Google’s upcoming privacy changes — which are scheduled to occur March 1st — will cause “irreparable injury to EPIC and the public.” EPIC claims that the change violates a settlement agreement that Google and the FTC reached last march forbidding any privacy changes without consent from the user. EPIC is asking that the court issue a temporary restraining order as well as a preliminary injunction compelling the FTC to enforce the settlement agreement.
EPIC believes that by unifying user data across Google’s multiple platforms — the search engine, Google+, Gmail, etc — that advertisers would reap significant benefits and that Google misrepresented those advantages in its recent notification campaign. Apparently, the aggregated data would allow for more accurate, targeted advertising. Google replied with the standard fare of, “Protecting people’s privacy is something we think about all day across the company and we welcome discussions about our approach.”
Because God forbid I see a commercial for something I’m actually interested in purchasing. No, no show me more ads for feminine hygiene products, Wilford Brimley’s home-delivery diabetes kits, and auto insurance policies from that lady with the Ronald McDonald lips. But can we at least stop using “advertisers” as a catch-all boogeyman every time online privacy is mentioned? [MSNBC]



















Titsnass
Thursday, February 9, 2012 at 3:47 PMEh!… Started using Bing awhile ago, so Google had better pull it’s socks up, cos my search queries are important to them…. I mean, me… hell they’re important to somebody!
TSH
Thursday, February 9, 2012 at 4:00 PMI’m a fan of targetted ads: I recently discovered an online shop that I’d never have stumbled upon if it weren’t for Google’s knowledge of my habits, and which I will definitely use instead of my local retail shop.
Having said that, I *know* that they’re targetted, and I *know* how to opt-out (i.e., log out and use a different browser) so that I can get the “vanilla” ads and search results (and so that my data doesn’t get tainted by searches for video of sex between two consenting adults in the missionary position, solely for the purpose of procreation). This is a matter of user education, not regulation.
Ozoneocean
Thursday, February 9, 2012 at 4:07 PMYeah, this seems a giant storm in a teacup and not a sign of Google being “evil”, not in this instance, targeted ads are not an issue.
Now if Google then sold ON that info to insurance companies, or the police or private investigators or recruiting firms etc, that that WOULD me a fricken major issue. Apparently Facebook already does this or is going to, or something… Yet I’m not seeing much focus on that. It seems a far, far larger, more disturbing issue to me.
Plus, Apple letting any app developer record and sell on your entire address book without permission or knowledge… That’s a bigger issue too.
That privacy group need to pick their targets better.
S0ULphIRE
Thursday, February 9, 2012 at 4:24 PMThis, this this and this.
Isaac Shepherd
Friday, February 10, 2012 at 8:00 AMTards gon’ tard.