Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 21:00:54 -0700 (PDT)
From: Matt Hanson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: More on gmail worth posting
Presumably you have a Gmail account,
and do not object to Google's policies
But many of us will not send mail to gmail.com ...
Problem 1: Gmail is nearly immortal
Google offers 1 gig of storage, which is many times the storage offered by Yahoo or
Hotmail, or other Internet service providers that we know about. The powerful
searching encourages account holders to never delete anything. It takes three clicks
to put a message into the trash, and more effort to delete this message. It's much
easier to archive the message, or just leave it in the inbox and let the powerful
searching keep track of it. Google admits that even deleted messages will remain on
their system, and may also be accessible internally at Google, for an indefinite
period of time.
Google has been spinning their original position in press interviews, and with an
informal page described as a few words about privacy and Gmail. When we see fresh
material from Google, we check the modification date at the bottom of the terms-of-use
page and privacy page for Gmail. If these dates are still April 6 and April 8, we know
that nothing has changed. Google can modify these pages too, any way they want and
whenever they want, unilaterally. But at least these two pages carry slightly more
legal weight than other pages, because Google should attempt to notify users of
significant changes in these formal policies.
A new California law, the Online Privacy Protection Act, went into effect on July 1,
2004. Google changed their main privacy policy that same day because the previous
version sidestepped important issues and might have been illegal. For the first time
in Google's history, the language in their new policy makes it clear that they will be
pooling all the information they collect on you from all of their various services.
Moreover, they may keep this information indefinitely, and give this information to
whomever they wish. All that's required is for Google to have a good faith belief
that access, preservation or disclosure of such information is reasonably necessary to
protect the rights, property or safety of Google, its users or the public. Google,
you may recall, already believes that as a corporation they are utterly incapable of
bad faith. Their corporate motto is Don't be evil, and they even made sure that the
Securities and Exchange Commission got this message in Google's
IPO filing.
Google's policies are essentially no different than the policies of Microsoft, Yahoo,
Alexa and Amazon. However, these others have been spelling out their nasty policies in
detail for years now. By way of contrast, we've had email from indignant Google fans
who defended Google by using the old privacy language -- but while doing so they
arrived at exactly the wrong interpretation of Google's actual position! Now those
emails will stop, because Google's position is clear at last. It's amazing how a vague
privacy policy, a minimalist browser interface, and an unconventional corporate
culture have convinced so many that Google is different on issues that matter.
After 180 days in the U.S., email messages lose their status as a protected
communication under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, and become just another
database record. This means that a subpoena instead of a warrant is all that's needed
to force Google to produce a copy. Other countries may even lack this basic
protection, and Google's databases are distributed all over the world. Since the
Patriot Act was passed, it's unclear whether this ECPA protection is worth much
anymore in the U.S., or whether it even applies to email that originates from
non-citizens in other countries.
Google's relationships with government officials in all of the dozens of countries
where they operate are a mystery, because Google never makes any statements about
this. But here's a clue: Google uses the term governmental request three times on
their terms-of-use page and once on their privacy page. Google's language means that
all Gmail account holders have consented to allow Google to show any and all email in
their Gmail accounts to any official from any government whatsoever, even when the
request is informal or extralegal, at Google's sole discretion. Why should we send
email to Gmail accounts under such draconian conditions?
Problem 2: Google's policies do not apply
The phrasing and qualifiers in the Gmail privacy policy are creepy enough, but nothing
in any of Google's policies or public statements applies to those of us who don't have
Gmail accounts. Google has not even formally stated in their privacy policy that they
will not keep a list of keywords scanned from incoming email, and associate these with
the incoming email address in their database. They've said that their advertisers
won't get personally
