Google Announces New Privacy Policy

Last week, Google announced its new privacy policy, which will take effect on March 1. Google is doing away with the over 60 different existing privacy policies for its various products and replace them with one single shorter and simpler privacy policy.

Those who are most affected by this change are people with Google accounts. Under the new privacy policy, if a user is signed in to the Google account, Google will be able to collect and combine user information from across its various products and services. For example, Google will be able to collect and analyze your search terms on the Google search engine and suggest related videos when you next go onto YouTube. This will enable Google to form fuller and more comprehensive user profiles. As Google emphasized in its announcement, this change will allow it “to create one beautifully simple and intuitive experience across Google.”

Facebook is already able to combine its user data. Facebook tracks everything its users do while on their accounts and that user data is used to target advertisings for particular services and products to particular users. Given the volume of registered users and the often more personal nature of the information its users provide on the social networking site, Facebook has grown to be a formidable competitor to Google in the online advertising market.

This change to Google’s privacy policy is clearly an response to Facebook. The range of services and products Google provides is wider than that of Facebook. Though user data Facebook tend to be more personal, Google has attempted to rectify this with the launch of its own social networking site Google+ last year.  Now Google’s new ability to combine user data collected from different services will enable it to better integrate its user data and use it to better target its advertising.

Google’s new change to its privacy policy has raised concerns from some users as well as a number of members of the US Congress. Users cannot opt out of the new privacy policy to prevent their user information from being combined across Google services. Google’s answer is rather unsatisfactory, i.e. don’t log in. information about users activities on Google services while not logged into their Google accounts would not be combined. However, without logging in, many of Google’s services would be inaccessible to users.

There have been growing privacy concerns about the user data Google and Facebook collect, which have attracted the attention of both US lawmakers and Federal Trade Commission. Google and Facebook both have had to settle with the FTC over investigations of privacy complaints in the past. Google’s privacy policy change is likely to attract further regulatory scrutiny.

SOPA and PIPA: The White House Changes Its Stance

The explosion in major names denouncing  SOPA and PIPA (including giants of the internet like Google, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, and the Wikimedia foundation, who are all considering an unprecedented ‘blackout’ on January 18th) now has a new supporter in the name of the White House and the Obama administration.  Read the rest of this entry »

The End of the Internet?

Tension between the interests of copyright holders and the accessibility and openness of the Internet is not a new phenomenon – Napster anyone? However, a potentially game-changing new development in online intellectual property and copyright law is currently making its way through the United Stages legislature. The Stop Online Piracy Act, or SOPA, was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives in October of this year. The Act was given hearing in front of the House Judiciary Committee on November 16, 2011; its counterpart in the Senate, the PROTECT-IP Act, was introduced in May of this year and has since been passed. Read the rest of this entry »

SCC Judgement: Hyperlinking to Content Does Not Constitute Republication

Last Wednesday (October 19th, 2011), the Supreme Court of Canada released its judgement on Crookes v. Newton (2011 SCC 47). The case focused on whether or not liability existed when one post hyperlinks to allegedly defamatory material on the internet. The court’s decision was succinctly summarized by Justice Abella, who stated, “I would conclude that a hyperlink, by itself, should never be seen as “publication” of the content to which it refers.”  Read the rest of this entry »

Federal Government Introduces New Copyright Reform Bill

Last week the Canadian federal government introduced Bill C-11, entitled An Act to Amend the Copyright Act. Since 2005, there had been three failed attempts at copyright reforms by the federal government. The last such attempt was Bill C-32 introduced in June 2010 during the last parliament, which died on the order paper when the federal election was called last spring. The new Bill C-11 is identical to Bill C-32. The following are some of the highlights from the bill: Read the rest of this entry »

Crowdsourcing Justice in the London Riots

Following Vancouver’s example in June, social media has once again been enlisted to help identify the rioters and looters of London’s riots last week. Scotland Yard has posted stills from surveillance cameras on their Flickr account, asking for help in identifying suspects. And independent “name-and-shame” sites have also cropped up, including one Tumblr site called “Catch a Looter”. A twist in London’s case, however, is the potential use of face recognition technology, a tool the Vancouver Police Department declined to use in their investigations.  Read the rest of this entry »

The Legality of Online Anonymity: Two Cases

The Ontario Superior Court of Justice recently released two decisions, one last month and one last week, on the issue of online anonymity, tackling that delicate balance between competing privacy interests, the public interest of promoting justice by facilitating the prosecution of defamation and the underlying values of freedom of expression. Read the rest of this entry »

Peanuts and Ponies and Parodies! Oh My!

Generally and theoretically, ‘fair dealing’ in Canada, or ‘fair use’ in the U.S., is meant to foster creativity and innovation, to be a limitation and exception to the copyright holder’s exclusive rights. When it comes to applying fair dealing/use to parodies, however, the exception becomes murky.

A Tumblr blog, “Peanutweeter”, used to have thousands of people following their juxtaposition of classic “Peanuts” cartoons with unrelated, and less innocent, tweets. Unamused, Iconix Brand Group, joint copyright holders with the heirs of creator Charles Schulz, claimed copyright infringement, issued a takedown order and the blog was shut down in June. Read the rest of this entry »

CRTC’s Net Neutrality Regulation: Superficial

Enforcement has always been the bane of any regulatory agency’s existence. Regulation without teeth hardly merits real attention, or compliance, from those being regulated. In documents released on Friday, Professor Geist of the University of Ottawa, has found the CRTC’s well-publicised Telecom Regulatory Policy (2009), policy which is supposed to regulate net neutrality in Canada, to be rather, well, toothless.   Read the rest of this entry »

Microsoft’s Censorship Search Deal with China

On the day America celebrated its independence, Microsoft announced its growing presence in the Chinese market for online searches with a deal with Baidu, China’s leading search engine: Microsoft will supply search results for English-language queries on the Chinese search provider. More controversially, Microsoft will also censor its search results according to local law.  Read the rest of this entry »