15 Mar 2006
A federal judge in San José, California said on Tuesday that he intends to order Google to give up data on users' search queries after the US government agreed to water down its request.
Instead of the initial request to hand over millions if not billions of search queries, a government representative said that it would be seeking only 50,000 web addresses and 5,000 search queries. A ruling is expected in the coming days or weeks.
The US government requested last year that Google hand over all search queries, and the URLs that they identify, over a one-month period, and later revised the request to one million URLs and one week of anonymous search queries.
The US Department of Justice claimed that it required the information to revive a law that aims to shield children from online pornography.
Google refused to comply with the request, arguing that it constituted a violation of privacy rights and that its database is a trade secret. Google's decision prompted the DoJ to file a lawsuit in January.
"Google is, of course, concerned about the availability of materials harmful to minors on the internet, but that shared concern does not render the government's request acceptable or relevant," Google said in response to the subpoena in February.
Other search companies, including Yahoo, MSN and AOL, have complied with the government's request.
The case has raised concerns over online privacy and the government's right to subpoena online service providers to hand over data without users' knowledge or consent.
A perceived lack of privacy could cause users to shun online storage services, including Google's Search Across Computers which stores users' documents temporarily on Google's servers.
Latest stories from Web
Related videos
Related articles
Related jobs
Poll
Are you confident that the UK's IT infrastructure is secure from attack in the wake of the Flame malware revelations?
Orange and Intel talk us through the ins and outs of their San Diego smartphone
Connect with V3.co.uk
The wrong printers, for the wrong tasks on the wrong contracts
Who leads the BI pack and who should we be watching out for?
Our client, a specialist in their industry, is working...
JOB DESCRIPTION Job Title: Project Manager...
Für unseren Kunden, ein spannendes IT Unternehmen in...
Application Support Analyst with Oil & Gas Trading...
Keep up to date with the latest products, services and technologies from the world's leading IT companies. IThound.com brings you over 2,000 white papers, case studies and analyst reports.
Do you agree?
Domestic spying at its best
Nevermind that privacy rights have been bruised repeatedly in the past, but now privacy rights are mounted against protecting children. I am an older sister of four who avidly demands that sexual predators be stopped. However, I feel that the false dichotomy posed in this decision will be the open door for future privacy infringements. It feels too much like policing Big Brother waiting for our own incrimination. Pigs to slaughter. Undeniably, we have a right to our fellow citizens, namely the innocent, to do what is in our power to prevent agrievences; however, we must not allow our red lights to be ignored. Is this decision honestly going to make a difference? It seems that we are faced with a "Dirty Harry" problem where justice is not guaranteed. If this is the case, then we should reconsider the implications something like this may have.
Posted by: Danielle Hudson 17 Mar 2006