General discussion

Locked

What do you think of all the big brother stuff?

By zlitocook ·
The US Justice Department confirmed yesterday that Microsoft, Yahoo! and AOL have already complied with its request to hand over the details of queries submitted to the search engine - a fact that was disclosed in court documents this week. The DoJ wants the information, not for a criminal prosecution, but as background material to bolster its attempt to revive a Clinton-era anti-pornography law.
This is from http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/01/21/gonzales_vs_google/
It looks like the government is looking at what ever they want and using what ever they can to do it. I hate child porn and anyone who looks at it and they should be put behind bars! But refering to this now is lame and just another way to see what we are doing.
What do you think?

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

629 total posts (Page 1 of 63)   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next
| Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

I don't like it one bit

by AV . In reply to What do you think of all ...

Most definitely, Google, AOL, Yahoo and Microsoft have a treasure trove of information about all of us. I don't think the government should be allowed to data mine this information to bolster a porn law. No one likes child porn, but I don't like my right to privacy being violated either.

It certainly makes me think twice about what I might search on on the internet. Maybe I could be the next "person of interest" if I search on the wrong words.

The truth is, you don't know what the government will really do with the information. I don't trust the government's intentions and I don't like losing the right to be free to search on what I want without them looking over my shoulder.

I also don't agree with Bush's wiretaps without warrants either. He says its necessary to fight the war on terror, I say if he really wanted to fight the war on terror he would do something about our open borders and our illegal immigrant population, aside from offering them temporary worker permits.

Hats off to Google. Finally, a company thats willing to defend the right to privacy for its customers. I'm truly surprised that the others were so willing to comply. Maybe they forgot what country they're in.

Collapse -

it's not just the US thats affected

by mjwx In reply to I don't like it one bit

First of all Kudos to AmericanVoter more people need to take a stand against this kind of invasion of privacy.

Second of all, the information the US gov has requested contains a great deal of data on people outside the US. This is something the US gov defiantly has no right to do (it can even go so far as to be considered espionage).

To keep it in perspective this isn?t like placing CCTV cameras in public places (these have actual helped solve crimes) or confiscating computers that contain kiddie porn. The US will have access to all searches not just the ones related to this law (which again only exists in the US). How can we be sure that the US gov is not also looking for ?Subversive Content? (I am also attacking china for doing this but at least they admit doing it).

Can a society maintain its freedom when a government is permitted to conduct searches without reasonable proof of any wrong doings?

?The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing? - Edmund Burke

Collapse -

Data on people outside of US

by M_a_r_k In reply to it's not just the US that ...

"the information the US gov has requested contains a great deal of data on people outside the US. This is something the US gov defiantly [sic] has no right to do."

I disagree. I'm not saying the govt does or does not have the right to any search engine information. But suppose they DO have this right. Then, with Google being an American company traded on an American stock exchange and operating within the US, the govt certainly would have every right to access data regardless if that data was generated by a US citizen or not and generated from inside the US borders or not. Since when does being a foreign citizen give you higher standing than American citizens when American laws and regulations are concerned?

Collapse -

I disagree

by stargazerr In reply to Data on people outside of ...

The Goverment will have every right to monitor a non US citizen if he/she is generating data inside US borders but they do not have the right to monitor data generated outside the US borders.

Any data generated outside US borders will come under the jurisdiction of the courts of the country the person belongs to. American Laws are only applicable within american borders, not outside.

]:)

P.S I just think monitoring a search engine is wrong. Full Stop.

Collapse -

We do agree on one thing

by M_a_r_k In reply to I disagree

...monitoring a search engine is wrong. I'm not sure how useful it would be for any government to be able to obtain records of searches made on a search engine. They can't trace any search to any single individual. They could only trace it to an IP address. If I have 9 criminals living in my house and we each have 9 criminal friends that visit on a regular basis and all 100 of us use the Internet from my house, how can it be proven which of the 99 criminals used the Internet at any point in time to commit a crime (that rhymes!)? Notice I didn't say 100 criminals. The one person of the lot that's not a criminal is me.

I only used an American company and American laws in my post because the subject is about Google, an American company. You could substitute Ericsson and Sweden or Sony and Japan and the point would have been the same. I have a lot of college degrees but a law degree isn't one of them. When you said "Any data generated outside US borders will come under the jurisdiction of the courts of the country the person belongs to", were you saying that based on knowledge or opinion? If the US govt can't force Google to turn over search records, then a foreign country has no chance at all of doing so. I suppose all this e-commerce stuff is new territory even for legal experts. Transactions over the internet have to be viewed and regulated differently than transactions made in person. The main question appears to be this: if you commit an illegal act over the Internet, who has jurisdiction? The location from which the person made the transaction or the location which electronically processed the transaction? The point I was making was that, if it were up to me, I would say the country with jurisdiction over the electronic records should be the country in which the transaction was electronically processed. In reality, if such laws exist, it may depend on agreements between the two countries. The data is still held in one location. Who has jurisdiction over that data?

This may all turn out to be a good thing for an enterprising criminal. Which I am not, by the way. I already told you that I am not a criminal. I may be enterprising but I'm no criminal. President Richard Nixon said he wasn't a criminal but look where that got him. He resigned in disgrace. But I digress... Let's use you as an example. You're a gangster, aren't you? If you were a citizen of, say Tahiti (I'd love to go to scuba diving in Tahiti some day, but I'm digressing again...), and you used Google to commit a crime in the US, you would get away with it scot-free. Tahiti cannot force Google to provide information from its database because Tahiti laws do not have jurisdiction over an American company. And the US cannot get information about the crime from Google because it was made from a foreign country by a foreign citizen. Hmm... I think we're on to something here...

I think I just wrote a chapter of that book... :^O

Collapse -

Me ?? Gangster??

by stargazerr In reply to We do agree on one thing

Sure ... I'll play along

If I am a citizen of Tahiti and use google to commit a crime in the US, I will not get away scot free. The crime has been committed in US ... The US courts have the right to trial a non US citizen, if the crime is commited inside the US borders ... But, only because Google is a US company, the government of USA has no jurisdiction over non US citizens,if the crime has not been commited in the US ....

Knowledge or Opinion?? Lets say ..... A bit of both

]:)

Collapse -

You're making me dizzy

by M_a_r_k In reply to Me ?? Gangster??

Ok then. If not Tahiti, how about Fiji?

Collapse -

Holiday??

by stargazerr In reply to Me ?? Gangster??

Or laws to go to Jail??

Hmmm ... Holiday in Fiji ... Sounds Good .... I am in ... Who's gonna book the tickets?? You will pay of course .. but i can book ...

]:)

Collapse -

Holiday of course

by M_a_r_k In reply to Me ?? Gangster??

You're getting good at booking things. You can book the trip. Of course I'll pay. I was planning on paying for the trip through my criminal activities once we got to Fiji. Or Tahiti. But alas! Fortunately I have a Plan B which has been created due to unfortunate circumstances. I haven't had done any vacation travelling in four years. So my vacation fund is brimming with extra cash. I'll use that. ****, I even have a Plan C. I'm co-authoring a book, you know, and I'm expecting a windfall of profits from that best-seller.

Collapse -

How ?? how?? how?? how how how??

by stargazerr In reply to Me ?? Gangster??

do we manage to ram headalong into a topic alltogether different every single time ??

WARNING !!! This comment has nothing to do with what I am about to say ..... HOLIDAY?? YOU'RE ON ...

]:)

Back to Community Forum
629 total posts (Page 1 of 63)   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next

General Discussion Forums