1 / 14

Gmail & Privacy

Gmail & Privacy. A report on a Consolidated Litigation against Google, Inc. by Ben Cumber. Who’s Suing?. 7 plaintiffs from all over the U.S. Texas Florida Illinois Maryland Pennsylvania 2 from California. Why is Google being sued?. Gmail scans all email that it handles.

licia
Download Presentation

Gmail & Privacy

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Gmail & Privacy A report on a Consolidated Litigation against Google, Inc. by Ben Cumber

  2. Who’s Suing? • 7 plaintiffs from all over the U.S. • Texas • Florida • Illinois • Maryland • Pennsylvania • 2 from California

  3. Why is Google being sued? Gmail scans all email that it handles. • Spam Filters • Virus protection • Targeted Advertisements • User Profiles • Search • Spell-check

  4. Targeted Advertisements

  5. Why is Google being sued? Gmail scans all email that it handles. • Spam Filters • Virus protection • Targeted Advertisements • User Profiles • Search • Spell-check

  6. User Profiles • “Map” of user’s interactions collected from several of Google’s Apps. • Compilation of all the extracted data. • Marketing purposes. • Concerning? • They didn’t ask. • What are they doing with this information? • How much do they collect? • What do they collect?

  7. Gmail- The Secret Data Mining Machine Plaintiffs Argue: “Google actually diverts email messages to separate devices to extract the meaning of the message” [1] • Violation of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act(ECPA) of 1986. • Wiretap Act which prohibits the interception of any electronic communication in transit.

  8. Gmail- The Secret Data Mining Machine • Google argues that they are exempt from the Wiretap Act. • Exceptions to the Wiretap Act include • “devices used by wire and Electronic Communication Service Providers in the ordinary course of business”[4] • What is Gmail’s “ordinary course of business”?

  9. Ordinary Course of Business • Google’s argument – Everything we do is in our ordinary course of business and Yahoo! does it. • Plaintiff’s argument – Gmail’s ordinary course of business is to assist in sending and receiving email. • Courts ruling – Google’s interception is outside of their ordinary course of business.

  10. Lack of Consent • Google’s argument- Everyone, even non-gmail users, consent to the interception of email. • Plaintiff’s argument - No one agrees to the interception of email for the uses of targeted advertising and creation of user-profiles. • Courts ruling – Google does not explicitly state that an interception will be used for targeted advertisements or creation of user-profiles.[3][2]

  11. State Laws • CIPA - California’s anti-wiretapping law. • Section 631 – State version of Wiretap Law • Section 632 – Confidential communication statute • Maryland, Florida, Pennsylvania state laws. • All of these laws mirror the ECPA except for: • California’s Section 632 of the CIPA • Pennsylvania’s statute • Only protects the sender from wiretapping but not the receiver.

  12. Trial? • Will the case make it to trial? • What does that mean for email? • What does that mean for targeted advertising in general?

  13. Questions?

  14. References [1] DEFENDANT GOOGLE INC.’S MOTION TO DISMISS, No. 5:13-MD-002430-LHK (N.D. Cal. Sept. 5, 2013), www.consumerwatchdog.org/resources/googlemotion061313.pdf [2] GMAIL PRIVACY POLICY,www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/, 10/3/2013. [3] IN RE GOOGLE INC. GMAIL LITIGATION, No. 13-MD-02430-LHK (N.D. Cal. Sept. 26, 2013). [4] PLAINTIFFS’ OPPOSITION TO GOOGLE INC.’S MOTION TO DISMISS, No. 5:13-MD-002430-LHK (N.D. Cal. Sept. 5, 2013), news.softpedia.com/media/opposition.pdf

More Related