×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

EU Commissioner Renews Call for Serious Fines in Data Privacy Laws

Unknown Lamer posted about 3 months ago | from the except-when-the-state-does-it dept.

EU 162

DW100 writes "Despite Google being fined €900,000 by Spanish authorities and €150,000 in France for its controversial privacy policies in recent months, an EU commissioner has admitted this is mere 'pocket money' to the company. Instead, a new legal regime that would have seen Google fined $1bn for breaching data protection laws is needed to make U.S. companies fear and respect the law in Europe. 'Is it surprising to anyone,' asked Commissioner Viviane Reding, 'that two whole years after the case emerged, it is still unclear whether Google will amend its privacy policy or not? Europeans need to get serious. And that is why our reform introduces stiff sanctions that can reach as much as 2% of the global annual turnover of a company. In the Google case, that would have meant a fine of EUR 731 million (USD 1 billion). A sum much harder to brush off.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

162 comments

LOL screw the EU (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46021639)

Remove all the services, and only leave them search. See how the people of the EU like that.

Re:LOL screw the EU (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46021705)

You're a fucking moron.

Re:LOL screw the EU (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46022115)

what a humungo burp!!

Re: LOL screw the EU (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46022135)

What would be the fine to the NSA and the local government's NSA partners?

Re:LOL screw the EU (1)

c0lo (1497653) | about 3 months ago | (#46021781)

Remove all the services, and only leave them search. See how the people of the EU like that.

That would be cool, but won't necessarily get Google off the hook: tracking/profiling the searches would still be a privacy violation.

Re:LOL screw the EU (5, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about 3 months ago | (#46021783)

Yes, it sure would suck for EU tech companies to suddenly have a few hundred million customers with a well-defined and established need in a market where the incumbent dominant player has just decided to quit. I am sure that their bank managers would complain about them putting more into their accounts than they were expecting and their politicians would be very upset by all of that money flowing in their economies instead of going to the US.

Re:LOL screw the EU (2)

jrumney (197329) | about 3 months ago | (#46021843)

I am sure that their bank managers would complain about them putting more into their accounts than they were expecting and their politicians would be very upset by all of that money flowing in their economies instead of going to Bermuda [huffingtonpost.com]

FTFY

Re:LOL screw the EU (2)

davester666 (731373) | about 3 months ago | (#46021865)

Yeah, EU companies would NEVER do the double-dutch to save on their tax bill, because taxes are at a much more reasonable level in the EU compared to the US.

Re:LOL screw the EU (4, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about 3 months ago | (#46021885)

Note that I didn't say anything about taxes. Even if the company is avoiding all of its taxes, if its infrastructure and employees are all based in the EU then that's money circulating in the EU, which is of net benefit to the local economy and likely to result in local benefits and even in more total tax revenue. This is a big part of the reason why countries try to give companies tax breaks: even if none of the money is paid directly in taxes, it's better to have it circulate locally than to be sent elsewhere. This worked a lot better when you got a factory employing ten thousand people for your multimillion dollarpound tax break, rather than a datacenter employing 50...

Re:LOL screw the EU (2, Insightful)

stenvar (2789879) | about 3 months ago | (#46022207)

This is a big part of the reason why countries try to give companies tax breaks: even if none of the money is paid directly in taxes, it's better to have it circulate locally than to be sent elsewhere.

In well functioning economies, "circulating money" is a sign of lots of useful economic activity. Such useful activity happens when companies make things people want.

But you're confused about cause and effect: you can't make an economy function well by forcing money to circulate. You and I can play ping pong with our wallets and circulate money between us all day long and nobody is going to benefit. If you tax that activity, the money will disappear entirely.

This worked a lot better when you got a factory employing ten thousand people for your multimillion dollarpound tax break, rather than a datacenter employing 50...

"Better" in what sense? The people back then had a much lower standard of living, their work was harder and more dangerous. And fewer people were working overall.

if its infrastructure and employees are all based in the EU then that's money circulating in the EU,

Because in Economics 101, we all learn that if we force goods (and hence money) to circulate within a country and to stop them from crossing borders, everybody is so much better off than if we let them engage in trade! Protectionism, yeah! It's worked so well!

Protectionism? (3, Interesting)

fyngyrz (762201) | about 3 months ago | (#46022567)

Protectionism, yeah! It's worked so well!

[looks around] notes missing steel industry, almost dead car industry, Detroit, electronics industry, retreating engineering industry, small widget manufacturing, semiconductor manufacture, computer manufacture, clothing manufacture... I'm really not sure that open trade has worked out that well, frankly. For that matter, in the intellectual areas where we maintained some presence for a little longer... not so much today. Companies think nothing of outsourcing anything they can, and countries like India are happy to fill those roles. Of course, we're still pushing paperwork around on Wall street and etc., and we have basic food commodities and some oil resources, but we're really not doing that well overall.

Within our borders, we have a large workforce, many of whom are unemployed, a large market, and immense natural resources, all within our borders. Economically speaking, it seems to me that a round of protectionism might not be a bad idea at all at this juncture.

Re:LOL screw the EU (1)

xelah (176252) | about 3 months ago | (#46022749)

This is a big part of the reason why countries try to give companies tax breaks: even if none of the money is paid directly in taxes, it's better to have it circulate locally than to be sent elsewhere.

In well functioning economies, "circulating money" is a sign of lots of useful economic activity. Such useful activity happens when companies make things people want.

But you're confused about cause and effect: you can't make an economy function well by forcing money to circulate. You and I can play ping pong with our wallets and circulate money between us all day long and nobody is going to benefit. If you tax that activity, the money will disappear entirely.

That's the reason why economists distinguish between transfers and actual spending. Transfers don't count in GDP and, indeed, do not represent production. You give money to someone: transfer. Government taxes your money and gives it to a benefits recipient person: transfer. But it's not true that you can't force money to circulate or that money somehow disappears when you tax it (where do you think it goes, exactly?). Government taxes and spends it on infrastructure: infrastructure spending is not a transfer and IS money being made to circulate. Government taxes well off people who save more and gives it to poorer people: a transfer, but money in the hands of poorer people tends to circulate more.

if its infrastructure and employees are all based in the EU then that's money circulating in the EU,

Because in Economics 101, we all learn that if we force goods (and hence money) to circulate within a country and to stop them from crossing borders, everybody is so much better off than if we let them engage in trade! Protectionism, yeah! It's worked so well!

Trade is good, in general, yes, with some downsides. But it's not money crossing borders that's so much the problem, except possibly within the Eurozone. Money doesn't cross borders that much, instead one currency is swapped for another. For an EU citizen to buy stuff from Google (or for Google to repatriate profits) he finds someone with dollars who wants to swap them for his own currency. Sometimes this person might be a central bank or US citizen wanting to leave them in a bank account. But most of the time this is someone wanting to buy something in the EU. Goods, promises (ie, loans), asset ownership and similar are exchanged across borders, but often not money. When a country gets problems with its trade balance that means that lots of goods are coming in but are being exchanged for asset ownership or loan claims going out (or vice versa for surplus countries). For that reason, a government borrowing heavily in a country with a low savings rate, as in the US, can cause problems for that country's exporters. And a government saving heavily in a country with a high savings rate, as in China, does the opposite. Both of these effects are seen in the exchange rate, of course.

Re:LOL screw the EU (1)

icebike (68054) | about 3 months ago | (#46022079)

Yes, it sure would suck for EU tech companies to suddenly have a few hundred million customers with a well-defined and established need in a market where the incumbent dominant player has just decided to quit. I am sure that their bank managers would complain about them putting more into their accounts than they were expecting and their politicians would be very upset by all of that money flowing in their economies instead of going to the US.

Except the part where the EU has nothing waiting in the wings that comes anywhere near to the package Google offers.
Lets face it, Google cutting off the EU would bring the continent to its knees for months and months.

Yandex couldn't possibly scale fast enough, and the EU threatening Yandex with silly fines could see great segments of
the EU suddenly without enough gas to warm a teapot.

Google's privacy troubles all started when they consolidated them into ONE manageable control panel, rather than
10 or 12 individual policies that were unworkable.

How much does the EU want for free?

Re:LOL screw the EU (2)

gnasher719 (869701) | about 3 months ago | (#46022375)

Except the part where the EU has nothing waiting in the wings that comes anywhere near to the package Google offers. Lets face it, Google cutting off the EU would bring the continent to its knees for months and months.

Not at all. Microsoft adds a few thousand servers to Bing, sells a copy of their server software to Amazon and Apple, and we'll never need Google again.

Re:LOL screw the EU (1)

q.kontinuum (676242) | about 3 months ago | (#46022395)

The only segment Google is really market leader by quality is IMO search. For all other areas (Mail, News, Social networks, Maps, Mobile OS, whatever) there are technically equally good or even better alternatives, for most areas even within Europe. (Mail-providers are available for ages, for social networks Facebook is not European but more widely used than Google+ while Diaspora would be a technically better solution than either of them, for Mobile OS there is SailfishOS [Yes, with an Android compatibility layer to let Android-Apps run; not because Android is better but because it has more market share by now and would be difficult to catch up], Meego and others, for Maps we have HERE and Openstreetmap). These alternatives are not widely used due to Googles market dominance, but they are good and available. I'm not sure what the impact would be if Google Search would vanish, but I think we will survive.

Re:LOL screw the EU (1)

icebike (68054) | about 3 months ago | (#46022639)

Nothing comes close to Google maps.
And don't even bother mentioning Open street maps. Just don't.

Let's face it, the EU is looking for a money grab, trying to extort Google back to an unworkable privacy model with every service having its own rules and its own sign up. Yet this is not what EU citizens want. Those that do have already closed their Google accounts and exported all their data (something no other service even offers). All 6 users that couldn't abide by googles integrated sign on have left.

Everyone else likes it and uses it to their advantage. The EU is working against the wishes and against the interests of its citizens.

Re:LOL screw the EU (3, Informative)

q.kontinuum (676242) | about 3 months ago | (#46022809)

Nothing comes close to Google maps.

HERE (including former Navteq!) has 80% market share in all car navigation systems. The map data is quite good, the routes calculated by here.com are also on par with Google (sometimes slightly better, at other times slightly words). Maybe Google has some more point of interest listed, but this is a matter of market share of the software as a guide rather than only routing. The more people use HERE map data and software as a guide, the more points of interest they will add.

Everyone else likes it and uses it to their advantage. The EU is working against the wishes and against the interests of its citizens.

Unfortunately most people do not understand the significance of privacy and free speech. Ask people if they'd sell the right to speak out on one tiny specific topic for 1000€ annually, and you will see that freedom has a price-tag. Nevertheless I think governments should prevent people from selling their privacy and freedom. (Yes, sounds illogical to force people to stay free. I'm still working on that one :-)

Sounds like an India shakedown (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46021653)

Can't tax these damn global corporations as they use tax shelters at the country with the lowest corporate taxes.

Solution: Fine them for random stuff for a lot of money, but not so much money they'll stop doing business in your country.

This way you can let business flourish in your country and selectively tax each one the exact amount they can afford to pay without having to write spaghetti tax code.

brilliant really.

Re:Sounds like an India shakedown (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46021673)

I'm sure that money will be well and wisely spent.

Re:Sounds like an India shakedown (5, Insightful)

moronoxyd (1000371) | about 3 months ago | (#46021951)

Solution: Fine them for random stuff for a lot of money.

This isn't random stuff.
Just because the US doesn't know what proper consumer protection and privacy laws are doesn't mean it isn't important.

Re:Sounds like an India shakedown (4, Insightful)

erikkemperman (252014) | about 3 months ago | (#46022109)

Solution: Fine them for random stuff for a lot of money.

This isn't random stuff.
Just because the US doesn't know what proper consumer protection and privacy laws are doesn't mean it isn't important.

Indeed. It's interesting that a lot of Americans respond to stories like this mostly with "zomg taxes!" It's almost as if you can't even imagine there is really an aspect of consumer protection involved. That says something about what you guys expect from government, methinks.

Conversely I think this goes some way to explaining why a lot of Europeans don't actually mind taxes, certainly not as reflexively and dogmatically as many Americans seem to oppose them: they believe that these payments, or at least a part of them, will be spent toward their wellbeing.

Re:Sounds like an India shakedown (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46022233)

It's almost as if you can't even imagine there is really an aspect of consumer protection involved.

Not in this case.

That says something about what you guys expect from government, methinks.

Very little indeed, which is why we're actually doing better than you guys.

certainly not as reflexively and dogmatically as many Americans seem to oppose them: they believe that these payments, or at least a part of them, will be spent toward their wellbeing.

If Americans were "reflexively" against taxes, they wouldn't be collecting so many of them and the top marginal income tax rates would come down. Right now, they're higher than in Germany and the Netherlands (where you seem to be from), but Europeans don't figure that out because they don't even understand how the tax systems work.

Conversely I think this goes some way to explaining why a lot of Europeans don't actually mind taxes

I think a better explanation is that the average European voter is even less informed than the average American voter.

Re:Sounds like an India shakedown (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46022321)

American income tax (accoridng to a website on the internet - wikipedia?)
lets take the top 20% of people in the USA, average wage.

All up; earning 264,700 dollars, after all brackets are taken into account, you pay 20.1% tax on that money. (and 21.4% tax on money from dividends and capital gains - whatevs)

But; lets pretend you live in california, which apparently has the suparhugesttaxevar according to some crazy ass tax website.
it puts ontop 13.3% income tax! (its progressive also; but Im gonna make it worst case scenario - they just tax the shit out of everything at 13.3%)

so; those people pay 33.4% tax on their total take home pay! OMG! TAX IS THE WORST IN THE USA

According to some tool [ato.gov.au] I just whacked that income into; the tax payable for a 264,700 dollar income in australia is:
$92,662.00

hmm; compare that number... 0.334 * 264,700 ... 88,409.8 doesn't seem as high as 92,662

And; now you'll tell me property taxes something something, to which I will respond with Australia has to pay rates and bills and shit too. We also have land-transaction taxes; capital gains taxes that get lumped right on top (at the highest rate since you have already earned your lowest rate amounts).

I am not complaining. I am complaining that you dumbass Americans wont let go of the fact that you have to pay taxes. When what you guys pay IS NOT HIGH, and top it off, you guys pay less for petrol than everyone else in the fucking world; you pay less for food than everyone else in the fucking world.

Seriously, YOU DO NOT PAY HIGH TAXES - STOP THIS BULLSHIT.

Re:Sounds like an India shakedown (1)

erikkemperman (252014) | about 3 months ago | (#46022487)

That says something about what you guys expect from government, methinks.

Very little indeed, which is why we're actually doing better than you guys.

Better in what way, exactly? As a blanket statement this seems meaningless to me...

If Americans were "reflexively" against taxes, they wouldn't be collecting so many of them and the top marginal income tax rates would come down. Right now, they're higher than in Germany and the Netherlands (where you seem to be from), but Europeans don't figure that out because they don't even understand how the tax systems work.

Well, suppose I think it might be more complicated than what you're saying, which seems to amount to "Europeans are too stupid to understand US or even their own tax systems". Top bracket income in the Netherlands is at 52%, the number I just found for the US is 39%.

Of course with all the various accounting tricks and outright evasion, available on both sides of the Atlantic, nobody in that top bracket actually pays anything near these respective amounts. I seem to remember Warren Buffet making a point of saying he paid less taxes, proportionally, than his secretary, post-loopholes.

Conversely I think this goes some way to explaining why a lot of Europeans don't actually mind taxes

I think a better explanation is that the average European voter is even less informed than the average American voter.

Based on what? I'm certainly not about to argue that the average European is intrisically better informed than his US counterpart, but I don't see any evidence for the reverse either.

Re:Sounds like an India shakedown (1)

girlintraining (1395911) | about 3 months ago | (#46022399)

Indeed. It's interesting that a lot of Americans respond to stories like this mostly with "zomg taxes!"

Clearly you don't watch a lot of TV... because that's the only way you'd find this observation interesting. Mass media has conditioned them to react that way.

That says something about what you guys expect from government, methinks.

Our already low standards can always be revised downward. It's called aging. When you're in 5th grade, you think you got a pretty good idea about how the government works, and it seems like an alright system. By the time you graduate from college, you have this suspicion that the country is run by morons. When you hit your 30s... you're certain of it.

Hypocrites (5, Interesting)

EmperorArthur (1113223) | about 3 months ago | (#46021675)

The EU is also responsible for the Data Retention Directive [wikipedia.org]. Worse, most of their spy agencies are just as bad as the NSA. When you combine that with the lack of free speech in many EU countries it doesn't paint a pretty picture.

They're going to force companies to keep user data on EU soil. Which sounds nice, but that means they can force companies to keep your data for as long as they want and hand it all over to "law enforcement" when you've done something inconvenient. They will then have things like search results censored. (See Google France) I hate to say it, but people in the EU have even less privacy than those of us in the US. Even with/especially because of these privacy directives.

Re:Hypocrites (3, Informative)

abhi_beckert (785219) | about 3 months ago | (#46021729)

Worse, most of their spy agencies are just as bad as the NSA.

When did a european spy agency pay the largest security firm in the world to put a back door in their encryption?

There is nobody in the world as bad as the NSA.

Re:Hypocrites (0)

girlintraining (1395911) | about 3 months ago | (#46022333)

There is nobody in the world as bad as the NSA.

East Germany calling from 1-800-BUL-SHIT.... it's for you.

Re:Hypocrites (1)

borl (586949) | about 3 months ago | (#46022411)

There is nobody in the world as bad as the NSA

Is it calling from 1990, when that would be relevant?

Re:Hypocrites (1)

girlintraining (1395911) | about 3 months ago | (#46022449)

Is it calling from 1990, when that would be relevant?

Oh, I'm sorry, do you think the NCA, Mossad, Al-amn al-Watani, Ministry Of Intelligence and Security, State Security Department, etc., don't spy on their own citizens too?

The NSA got caught. That's the distinction here. Not what they're doing. Everyone else is doing the same damn thing, they just didn't leave a cheeky 20-something unattended in the server room of their security archives.

I don't think the NSA is the worst of the lot, not by a long shot. There's plenty of recent historical examples of shit other intelligence agencies have done that make what the NSA is doing today look rather germane. There is no reason, whatsoever, to believe that they all suddenly reformed the day a wild Snowden appeared, and it was only the big, bad, evil NSA, that continued to rape, pillage, and whatever else.

No country would put its intelligence agencies at a competitive disadvantage merely to satisfy the petty outrage of an internet pundit.

Re:Hypocrites (1)

borl (586949) | about 3 months ago | (#46022695)

Oh, I'm sorry, do you think the NCA, Mossad, Al-amn al-Watani, Ministry Of Intelligence and Security, State Security Department, etc., don't spy on their own citizens too?

I don't recall saying or implying that, but nice strawman, and nice attempt at deflection. Your original post is still just as silly though.

The NSA got caught.

Isn't that kind of the point? Or would you please fill me in on how best to quantify this sort of thing without any reliable evidence?

I don't think the NSA is the worst of the lot, not by a long shot.

Nobody cares what you (or I) think is true. Based on stacks of documents provided by our pal Ed, the NSA is the worst of the lot at the moment. At the very least they're tied for first place, but with far better funding than their colleagues put together. This may well change when more information is revealed, but lets not pretend we know things that we don't, k?

There's plenty of recent historical examples of shit other intelligence agencies have done that make what the NSA is doing today look rather germane

As irrelevant as it was last time you brought it up last time.

No country would put its intelligence agencies at a competitive disadvantage merely to satisfy the petty outrage of an internet pundit.

No true country, indeed.

Re:Hypocrites (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46022415)

Well, let's not turn this into a race to the bottom, but I've heard that current spending on surveillance, per capita and presumably corrected for inflation, actually exceeds what the Stasi had to play with?

Re:Hypocrites (1)

q.kontinuum (676242) | about 3 months ago | (#46022431)

NSAs actions regarding surveillance are worse than the wettest dreams the East German StaSi could ever have imagined, for several reasons: 1. They didn't have the funds to do what NSA does 2. Technique developed a lot, everything is connected nowadays 3. USA pretends to be friends with most western countries, while East Germany was never trusted The StaSi did some pretty bad stuff as well when it came to physical actions against opponents, but since most of it is not publicly known (neither for StaSi nor for NSA) it's hard to compare.

Re:Hypocrites (1)

girlintraining (1395911) | about 3 months ago | (#46022489)

NSAs actions regarding surveillance are worse than the wettest dreams the East German StaSi could ever have imagined, for several reasons:

Are you really going to go full retard on me? Show me where the NSA created a secret police force in another country (repeatedly), and trained them, created a large network of "sleeper agents", assisted in smuggling in weapons and nuclear secrets, created and financed a terrorist organization responsible for thousands of civilian deaths, deseceration of cemeteries, orchestrated a large-scale industrial chemical disaster solely to distract from domestic problems, numerous assassinations, and routinely engaged in psychological warfare of social undesireables so extreme that its victims often committed suicide or went insane.

Please, show me this amazing and never-before documented evidence you have about comparable NSA activities. Because that is what the Stasi did in East Germany. To compare them to the NSA is, to put it mildly, intellectually dishonest. While you're at it, invest in a double-wrapped tin foil hat, because apparently single-ply isn't getting the job done with you anymore.

Re:Hypocrites (2)

q.kontinuum (676242) | about 3 months ago | (#46022563)

NSAs actions regarding surveillance are worse than the wettest dreams the East German StaSi could ever have imagined, for several reasons:

Are you really going to go full retard on me? Show me where the NSA created a secret police force in another country (repeatedly), and trained them, created a large network of "sleeper agents", assisted in smuggling in weapons and nuclear secrets, created and financed a terrorist organization responsible for thousands of civilian deaths, deseceration of cemeteries, orchestrated a large-scale industrial chemical disaster solely to distract from domestic problems, numerous assassinations, and routinely engaged in psychological warfare of social undesireables so extreme that its victims often committed suicide or went insane.

Please, show me this amazing and never-before documented evidence you have about comparable NSA activities. Because that is what the Stasi did in East Germany. To compare them to the NSA is, to put it mildly, intellectually dishonest. While you're at it, invest in a double-wrapped tin foil hat, because apparently single-ply isn't getting the job done with you anymore.

We were discussing surveillance here. But Ok, lets broaden the scope; only in that case lets not restrict it to NSA, but include other american secret services as well.

Ever read about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O... [wikipedia.org]?

Or about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G... [wikipedia.org]?

Or about do you know about the Taliban history, how they were created by CIA to fight against the Russians? (Steve Coll: Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and Bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001, February 23, 2004, Penguin Press HC, )

Re:Hypocrites (1)

umghhh (965931) | about 3 months ago | (#46022787)

I did not understand GP's post in a way that NSA v. Stasi argument is limited in some silly administrative way after all they were/are synonyms for their respective regimes and US does not have such a pristine record as you think it does. If you look at history of the country - take last 50 years you will get: wars, support of terrorist organisations (who gave stingers to Osama???), selling and smuggling weapons to places where the US thought it had business to support, As for assassinations - looking at the way drones of different US organisation kill people around the world I wonder how that compares with Stasi. The special techniques used to get info out of prisoners such as not allowed on US soil were applied in friendly NATO countries and when this irritated the public there it was moved to less scrupulous ones. I guess I can continue but for me US is not a beacon of freedom and all the good things as it pretended to be for years. It is certainly true that friends of NSA are doing the same shit here as the NSA does - the sending of data around to process in legally friendly environment is similar in ethical sense to washing money by sending it abroad. Still EU counties (some of them) have some privacy laws that are better than free for all in US. Whether these laws are respected is another matter. Jerk knee reaction of US citizens to anything gov does is in my view one of the reasons their gov is doing things ineffectively and violating rights of everybody along the way. You can take any policy - if it is needed it will be done anyway and if principled citizens do not accept it even if due to wrong reasons, then the workarounds are used - this is the way health systems seems to 'work' in US and that is the way saving of private data is done too: I am sure that if not possible in legally controlled way in the country for say for 3 months and available only under court order then they just send it offshore to say British friends and have free access as much as needed without hassle. And do not even get me started on death penalty, war on drugs, three strikes and you are out and general way the US justice systems seems to work. You seem to be a quite dangerous folk considering how many of you have to be put in jail compared with the rest. A country of the free that serve their time indeed.

US is increasing hated among less civilized nations and disliked among 'friends'. There are not enough marines and drones to change that. I am not saying that your country is falling apart. It is not and if you are careful it will prosper. Some of your citizens will prosper too with the rest just trying. As said - you are not a beacon for us no more. Instead you with your powerful economy are more of a threat for the rest of the world. Maybe less than some other countries and you still have quite some useful function for the 'free' world still your aura is not positive anymore.

Re:Hypocrites (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46022445)

Wow. Did your keyboard develop Tourette's, or did you really just post something that retarded.

Re:Hypocrites (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46021735)

Yep, the Euro has its own problems and can't keep its own house clean, so some good old fashioned attacks on a US company will generate enough good will to keep them relevant in the eyes of the people there.

If a French company did the same thing, this wouldn't be news, but anti-Americanism sells and keeps the politicos in office.

Re:Hypocrites (4, Informative)

moronoxyd (1000371) | about 3 months ago | (#46021977)

Yep, the Euro has its own problems and can't keep its own house clean, so some good old fashioned attacks on a US company will generate enough good will to keep them relevant in
the eyes of the people there.

I'm really getting tired of this.
You're just plain wrong.
European companies are fined just as much for this kind of thing.

The difference is: European companies are used to these laws and break them less often, and fines for EU companies are rarely talked about in the US

Most of the time this is not about 'oh, it's a US company, let's hit them' but about 'US companies think they don't need to care about local law, so the break it at need to be fined'.

Re:Hypocrites (-1, Troll)

girlintraining (1395911) | about 3 months ago | (#46022425)

You're just plain wrong.
European companies are fined just as much for this kind of thing.

Citation needed. Please show me a European company that's been subjected to as much scrutiny [wikipedia.org] as, say, Microsoft. Or show me a European company that's been fined as much as Google has. Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence. We know about Microsoft and Google... but sadly, I don't think you'll find anyone who's heard of these amazingly large fines towards European IT companies. That might be because there aren't really any counterparts to Google, Microsoft, Apple, etc., in Europe. And maybe, just maybe, Europe would like to change that. Perhaps... with really big fines?

What I'm getting really tired of, is people who idiotically believe that a government won't act in its own economic best interests because that would go against whatever whack-ass worldview they have about their own country vis a vis all the other countries. I mean, it seems rather obvious, but nobody's national anthem is "We're Number Two!"

Here is your citation (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46022527)

Even though your ranting makes no logical sense, you wanted a citation and I want to help you out.

Here you go: http://ec.europa.eu/competition/cartels/statistics/statistics.pdf

EU made rules. The companies agreed to the rules. If you break the rules - guess what - you get the penalty.

There's no use whining about it. If you don't like the rules to play nice with others then take your ball and play by yourself.

Re:Here is your citation (5, Informative)

Sockatume (732728) | about 3 months ago | (#46022627)

For those keeping track, all of their highest-ever Cartel fines were against EU companies, in one case jointly with a Korean company. If you read the numbers in the PDF they make everything Google and MS have ever paid with seem like a diner tip.

Saint Gobain (France)
Philips (Netherlands) and LG Electronics (Korea)
Deutsche Bank AG (Germany)
F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG (Switzerland)
Société Générale (France)
Siemens AG (Germany)
Pilkington (UK)
E.ON (Germany)
GDF Suez (France)

Re:Hypocrites (2)

c0lo (1497653) | about 3 months ago | (#46021789)

When you combine that with the lack of free speech in many EU countries it doesn't paint a pretty picture.

Lack of explicit regulation/laws on free speech and lack of free speech are two different things.

Re:Hypocrites (2)

EmperorArthur (1113223) | about 3 months ago | (#46021895)

Lack of explicit regulation/laws on free speech and lack of free speech are two different things.

In theory that's true, but many parts of the EU outright ban certain speech. For example, I don't like the Nazis and consider them to be horrible; However, when people are prevented from showing their colors to the world they, rightly, think that people are out to get them. So instead of some crazies yelling whatever they want you have people who can only get attention through things like violence.

"There are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury and ammo. Please use in that order." [wikipedia.org] Marginalized people like Neo Nazis* aren't allowed to speak in countries like France and Germany, they know there a minority so voting won't work, and no way that they would be allowed on a Jury. With that in mind it's surprising that we haven't seen more violence out of people like them.

*They're marginalized because they're horrid and nuts, but that just makes them more likely to do something dangerous and crazy.

Re:Hypocrites (1)

moronoxyd (1000371) | about 3 months ago | (#46021987)

"There are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury and ammo. Please use in that order." [wikipedia.org] Marginalized people like Neo Nazis* aren't allowed to speak in countries like France and Germany, they know there a minority so voting won't work, and no way that they would be allowed on a Jury. With that in mind it's surprising that we haven't seen more violence out of people like them.

Yeah. Isn't it strange that the oh so free US has more problems with extremists (Unabomber and the like) than the countries that you say should expect those kind of problems?

Re:Hypocrites (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46022141)

EU-resident, here: You seem to have forgotten Anders Behring Breivik, London bombings July 2005, Madrid train bombings March 2004, the foiled Mumbai-style attack on Jyllandsposten in Copenhagen December 2010, the unfolding German neo-nazi murder plot claiming 10 lives from 2000 to 2007 and countless other cases.

Seeing that the US has similar issues, I don't think a ban on extremist speech makes much of a difference.

Re:Hypocrites (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46022331)

Mass shootings at schools. (Note: the plural)

Re: Hypocrites (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46022111)

How are those "free speech zones" working for you?

That's right. You have a confined zone outside of view where you can protest all you want. That is not free speech at all.

Re:Hypocrites (2)

gnasher719 (869701) | about 3 months ago | (#46022353)

Marginalized people like Neo Nazis* aren't allowed to speak in countries like France and Germany, they know there a minority so voting won't work, and no way that they would be allowed on a Jury. With that in mind it's surprising that we haven't seen more violence out of people like them.

Neo-nazis are quite handy in Germany. When kids decide to have a fight, they look for some neo-nazis to beat up instead of law-abiding citizens, so everyone is happy.

Re:Hypocrites (1)

girlintraining (1395911) | about 3 months ago | (#46022357)

Marginalized people like Neo Nazis* aren't allowed to speak in countries like France and Germany, they know there a minority so voting won't work, and no way that they would be allowed on a Jury. With that in mind it's surprising that we haven't seen more violence out of people like them.

It's generally considered good form to revise one's assumptions when their predictive value has been lost. Or put another way: It's your understanding of these "marginalized people" that's faulty here.

*They're marginalized because they're horrid and nuts,

Ah yes, of course. It couldn't just be that you're a prejudiced asshole. It is, in fact, possible to be a minority that is not "horrid and nuts". See also: Every civil rights movement. Ever.

Re:Hypocrites (1)

c0lo (1497653) | about 3 months ago | (#46022419)

Marginalized people like Neo Nazis* aren't allowed to speak in countries like France and Germany, they know there a minority so voting won't work, and no way that they would be allowed on a Jury.

The way I know (but I might be wrong) neither France nor Germany has the institution of Jury.

With that in mind it's surprising that we haven't seen more violence out of people like them.

Well, other places, other folks, other habits (I'm deliberately letting aside the mater of culture)... Somehow, I don't find it strange at all (and no longer feel an urge to judge them).

*They're marginalized because they're horrid and nuts, but that just makes them more likely to do something dangerous and crazy.

Ummm... every "circle" has a fringe... of course there will always be some that would be disliked and avoided the most and highly probable they'd be considered nuts ("if only they'd change a bit their behavior, they'd be closer to the norm and accepted. They must be nuts to refuse to change"). I.e. if there would not be the nazi, some other group would be pushed outwards and become "the fringe"

Re:Hypocrites (-1, Troll)

girlintraining (1395911) | about 3 months ago | (#46021961)

The EU is also responsible for...

The entire reason for the EU was to try to show that Europe could compete with America economically. Naturally, they don't want to compete fairly... hence ginormous fines and byzantine rules to guarantee their application on a regular basis. Free market? Screw that. We're Europeans!

Re:Hypocrites (2)

15Bit (940730) | about 3 months ago | (#46022015)

Acually, the EU was a fairly logical evolution of the EEC (European Economic Community), which itself was an evolution of the ECSC (European Coal and Steel Community). The foundation of these earlier unions was not so much to compete as a block with the US, but more to avert another world war. The premise for this being that if you are trading actively with your neighbour and have easy immigration back and forth between the countries, your incentive to go to war with them is somewhat reduced/impeded. That the first agreement was for coal and steel is extremely significant, what with coal and steel being important raw materials for waging war.

Re:Hypocrites (1)

girlintraining (1395911) | about 3 months ago | (#46022105)

Acually, the EU was a

- US Constitution with all 27 Amendments - 7,818 words.
- EU Constitution: Nobody's really quite sure. It's approximately the size of a book at present, and nobody can really find a plain-text version on the internet... it's all been compressed into navigable websites, databases, and PDFs.
--

There is nothing logical about the EU.

Re:Hypocrites (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46022163)

Each EU nation has its own constitution (if they have one, unlike Britain for example).

Re:Hypocrites (1)

girlintraining (1395911) | about 3 months ago | (#46022295)

Each EU nation has its own constitution (if they have one, unlike Britain for example).

The EU constitution, also known as the Lisbon Treaty. Grow a brain.

Re:Hypocrites (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46022625)

No, actually the Treaty of Lisbon is not what you refer to as a 'EU Constitution'.

There was a huge effort to ratify Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe: the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_establishing_a_Constitution_for_Europe

The Treaty of Lisbon was later ratified instead. Although very similar on most parts, it is actually not a constitution.

Grow a brain. ;-)

Re:Hypocrites (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46022341)

US Constitution: regularly ignored. (NSA)

Value of both Constitutions: effectively nil

Hypocrites yourself (2)

aepervius (535155) | about 3 months ago | (#46022393)

keeping the data in EU means two very great things for me. 1) NSA must work harder to get it on their grubby hands , whereas with US firm they jsut need to ask 2) I can check the data and ask for rectification and so forth as an EU citizen, but good luck doing that in the US 3) it is much harder to market "me" in the Eu than it is in the US. My data you see cannot be sold that easily. 4) US law enforcement can pretty much run roughshed on my data in the US anyway so it isn't as if the EU law enforcement would be any worst

AS an EU citizen I'll take that convenience of 1 ,2 and 3 , and give my finger in the general direction of US firm and the NSA. Thank you.

So back at you.

Desperate Idiots (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46021709)

Unbelievable. Only desperate government bureaucrats could possibly look at administrative fines as a source of income that might save the EU from its financial woes. Excessive taxes, fines, and other means of taking money from the people they are supposed to protect are not the keys to prosperity. Strangling the free economy REDUCES your income, morons. Your efforts will only bring about the inevitable financial collapse of the EU more quickly.

P.S. Google is laughing at your superior intellect.

Re:Desperate Idiots (2)

moronoxyd (1000371) | about 3 months ago | (#46021995)

Unbelievable. Only desperate government bureaucrats could possibly look at administrative fines as a source of income that might save the EU from its financial woes. Excessive taxes, fines, and other means of taking money from the people they are supposed to protect are not the keys to prosperity.

Reality check: Big companies are not the people the European governments are supposed to protect. That are still the citizens of thoes countries. And the rights of those citizens are ignored by Google et. al.
So the governments are actually doing exactly what they should: Protect the rights of the citizens.

Re:Desperate Idiots (1)

girlintraining (1395911) | about 3 months ago | (#46022407)

Reality check: Big companies are not the people the European governments are supposed to protect.

Correct! Big companies in Europe are the "people" the European governments are supposed to protect. -_-

So the governments are actually doing exactly what they should: Protect the rights of the citizens.

False. They're protecting their own economic interests. Google is an American company that pays little (if any) taxes to Europe. Europe's governments therefore have an incentive to try to lock Google out via cumbersome and expensive legislation to encourage a European competitor to emerge. But I love how you think there's a government out there who honestly cares about the "rights of the citizens". If only there were some historical document [the] illustrating how [declaration] often that [of] happens we [independence] could look at.

Re:Desperate Idiots (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46022743)

False. They're protecting their own economic interests. Google is an American company that pays little (if any) taxes to Europe. Europe's governments therefore have an incentive to try to lock Google out via cumbersome and expensive legislation to encourage a European competitor to emerge. But I love how you think there's a government out there who honestly cares about the "rights of the citizens".

Maybe. But protecting a country's economic interests *is* part of the job of a government, or are we going to complain when politics actually do what they are supposed to do?
If the EU was protecting Google or any other company that pays no taxes in the EU, prevent economic growth within the EU, uses dumping tactics to destroy EU competitors, etc. then they would not be service the EU's public interest, right?
In the end it is a matter of competition, it is unfair competition if Google gets to compete with EU companies while not respecting EU law.

If Google does not like EU law, then it can leave the EU market, nobody is forcing them to stay, if we look at it, everybody wants them out.

Re:Desperate Idiots (1)

Sockatume (732728) | about 3 months ago | (#46022603)

If the reason you think someone's doing something is really, really stupid, maybe it's not actually the reason they're doing it. All the other people in the world are not morons.

Re:Desperate Idiots (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46022785)

what is being done that is stupid?
all the other people in the world do not have to agree with you either, or are you saying that because other people are doing it, should you do that also? There are many more million people in the world than in the US living with under 2 dollars per day, if they are not stupid and many more, would you lower your salary?

Better idea (1)

abhi_beckert (785219) | about 3 months ago | (#46021721)

Or even better, just tell google they have to stop selling services in Europe for a period of time, say 90 days. So nobody in Europe would be allowed to buy ads off Google while the ban was in place.

This would give competitors, who presumably adhere to EU law, a chance to step in and earn some revenue of their own.

Re:Better idea (1)

Rick in China (2934527) | about 3 months ago | (#46021831)

I don't think the world has ever had to fill a google-sized hole, so it's hard to estimate how that would go or how long that would take. I'm guessing it would take a f'in LONG TIME to fill a Google-hole where it has already remained king for so long, it would be drastically different than China...and I'm guessing there are also far more damaging impacts that would occur as a repercussion, not just opportunities as it seems are being supposed here.

Damn government (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46021725)

Always getting in the way of the free market capitalism that could exploit all of that information on people.

Why won't they think of the corporate people?

Everything's OK (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46021747)

Please call EU and make them fine Slashdot until they delete the new crap site.

"Oops! You do not appear to have javascript enabled."

This reminds me of Homer's "Everything's OK alarm" from the episode "The Wizard of Evergreen Terrace".

It would be a better service if Slashdot alerted people that forgot to disable javascript.

Big data (2)

LookIntoTheFuture (3480731) | about 3 months ago | (#46021765)

Finally, some restrictions on the mining of "big data". Some people have a HUGE problem with its collection and storage by greedy, sleazy, single minded corporations. Not to mention the fact that government goons can store and search that data however they please. Privacy is a human right. If you are willing to use it as currency to purchase shiny, you are part of the problem.

Re:Big data (1)

c0lo (1497653) | about 3 months ago | (#46021803)

Some people have a HUGE problem with its collection and storage by greedy, sleazy, single minded corporations.

Greedy, yes. Sleazy... maybe, highly probable. Single minded? In Google's case, I doubt it: they are a too intelligent bunch.

Re:Big data (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | about 3 months ago | (#46021899)

Some people have a HUGE problem with its collection and storage by greedy, sleazy, single minded corporations.

Greedy, yes. Sleazy... maybe, highly probable. Single minded? In Google's case, I doubt it: they are a too intelligent bunch.

Yep they will pay the Russian mob under the table to do it illegal through a subsidiary that funnels the money back to Google corporate. American companies do this all the time for tax evasion and patent lawsuits. They sign a contract that they wont sue anymore for a settlement for additional patents. The patent troll then looks at the patents and opens up a secret shell subsidiary and sues under that for the rest etc.

Re:Big data (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46021959)

And what they gonna fine the NSA for?

Talking about privacy.....

Next: websites wont work in EU (2)

Billly Gates (198444) | about 3 months ago | (#46021889)

The ad companies will cry foul and make websites give messages saying how the evil socialist EU regime is taking this website away. Please email X to tell them to reverse this law etc.

Since they are injecting Chrome with malware and adware through buying extensions and now circumventing adblock plus and making javascript fail to load if they detect blockers I would not put this past them.

Re:Next: websites wont work in EU (1)

girlintraining (1395911) | about 3 months ago | (#46022367)

The ad companies will cry foul and make websites give messages saying how the evil socialist EU regime is taking this website away.

Wrong, defined: You. The "ad companies" are not the people collecting thie data, they're not the ones whose servers are being hacked, aren't the ones with crappy internal security procedures, and are not collecting massive amounts of data on people's online habits and aggregating them into profiles. The "ad companies" are the consumers of this data, not the producers of it.

Since they are injecting Chrome with malware and adware through buying extensions and now circumventing adblock plus and making javascript fail to load if they detect blockers I would not put this past them.

Yes. It's every "ad company" that's doing this, not just a few rogue ones. Let's just throw the entire industry under the bus because of the actions of a few bad apples. Surely this reasoned response to the problem will provoke a long-term solution...

Re:Next: websites wont work in EU (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46022655)

The ad companies will cry foul and make websites give messages saying how the evil socialist EU regime is taking this website away.

Wrong, defined: You. The "ad companies" are not the people collecting thie data, they're not the ones whose servers are being hacked, aren't the ones with crappy internal security procedures, and are not collecting massive amounts of data on people's online habits and aggregating them into profiles. The "ad companies" are the consumers of this data, not the producers of it.

Free market says that if there's demand there's supply, and vice-verse. Arguably, Google started the supply, so, yes, Google (an "ad company") is evil because it produces an evil product (the data they steal -they collect data about people that do not use their crappy services- and abuse), but other "ad companies" buying an evil product are contributing by giving them money.
As they say, "if you are not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem", so "ad companies" could be part of the solution if they stopped buying targeted ads (which by the way, are a huge scam)

Re:Next: websites wont work in EU (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46022691)

Since they are injecting Chrome with malware and adware through buying extensions and now circumventing adblock plus and making javascript fail to load if they detect blockers I would not put this past them.

Do you have proof?
Anyway, what/why do you think they made Chrome for? If you use Chrome, you are voluntarily giving away everything. Chrome itself is "spy-ware", if you care for your rights, your privacy or hate ads, then use Firefox.

It's like using Android and caring for your rights or privacy or not wanting ads. Android is "spy-ware" as well (unless you remove all the Google crap).

Android and Chrome are there to perpetuate, accentuate and increase Google's data collection and monopoly.

Fines are a matter for risk management (3, Interesting)

Opportunist (166417) | about 3 months ago | (#46021919)

Not legal. When it comes to the question whether something "illegal" is done by a company, three things get taken into consideration:

1. What it costs to avoid the fine (or the profit to be had by ignoring the law, respectively)
2. Amount to pay when you get caught.
3. Chance to get caught.

That's it. And before someone asks, yes, risk management is part of my job, and these are essentially the considerations when it comes to laws. More and more often law changes get dumped on my desk rather than legal because we no longer avoid breaking the law by default, we check whether it pays to break it.

You'd be surprised how often it does...

Re:Fines are a matter for risk management (1)

NettiWelho (1147351) | about 3 months ago | (#46022167)

Can someone explain to a stupid person why the described behaviour wont just add additional charges of criminal conspiracy?

Re:Fines are a matter for risk management (1)

stenvar (2789879) | about 3 months ago | (#46022241)

Perhaps because it's not a "conspiracy"?

What's next? Are you going to throw people in jail who deliberately park in no parking zones?

Re:Fines are a matter for risk management (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 3 months ago | (#46022461)

Well, maybe because that's not what it is displayed as to the outside but as "some unfortunate mishap that we're truly sorry for"?

Duh.

Re:Fines are a matter for risk management (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46022199)

That's it. And before someone asks, yes, risk management is part of my job, and these are essentially the considerations when it comes to laws. More and more often law changes get dumped on my desk rather than legal because we no longer avoid breaking the law by default, we check whether it pays to break it.

Holy shit. You should check that policy with legal. The laws might be different in different countries but where I live I am pretty sure that if you intentionally and willingly break the law you are no longer protected as a worker at a company and can be held personally accountable.
The protection a company gets is there for the kind of negligence that can happen when many people think "someone else will take care of that" and such, not to protect calculated organized crime.
Your policy can actually put you in jail. (And for a very long time depending on what your company does.)
Actually, I wouldn't check with the company lawyers. Check this with a private lawyer.

Re:Fines are a matter for risk management (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 3 months ago | (#46022507)

You're acting like there's any company out there who does it differently.

Of course, the official course is to minimize damages and try to do whatever you can to uphold the law, but the extent you go to is mainly influenced by the cost to do so and the cost to pay the fine if it hits. Whether you want to admit that or not, it's the sad reality of business, and anyone not following that train of thought will not survive for long. You simply cannot afford putting security before profitability, as much as I'd like that, it just won't fly.

I made for the longest time the mistake to actually try to "do my job" the way I thought I should do it, i.e. do my best to protect my company. Bull. Nobody wants "best". What is wanted is the cheapest solution possible to appease the law well enough to lower fines below the cost of the implementation.

Re:Fines are a matter for risk management (1)

girlintraining (1395911) | about 3 months ago | (#46022391)

Not legal. When it comes to the question whether something "illegal" is done by a ...

Thank you, Sir Armchair Lawyer, for that insightful commentary. I'm sure you're a far better expert on the topic than the legal departments of all these major companies. Consider that just the laws of the United States are so numerous, so complex, that nobody on this planet is capable of being fully versed in them, and in fact they cannot even be counted with any accuracy. Entire libraries exist for the sole purpose of collecting these laws. Now, multiply that problem by the number of countries we're talking about here... and you can quickly discern that there is no clear-cut "legal" or "not legal" to be had. Anywhere.

That's it. And before someone asks, yes, risk management is part of my job

You're sucking at it.

and these are essentially the considerations when it comes to laws. More and more often law changes get dumped on my desk rather than legal because we no longer avoid breaking the law by default, we check whether it pays to break it.

So what you're basically saying is that you're actively engaged in unethical business practices, and are maliciously and intentionally subverting the law on behalf of your employer. Where did you say you worked in "risk management" again?

You'd be surprised how often it does...

The only thing I'm surprised about... is how often people fail to utilize any critical thinking skills. But I have no empirical basis for this: Stupid people pretty much cram every nook and cranny on every internet forum. Perhaps it's some vestiges of youthful optimism that I haven't yet rid myself of...

Re:Fines are a matter for risk management (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46022403)

Chicken Shit - token Fines - pandering / slap across the wrists. Utter BS!

Let's see, EU's combined population is more that the USA. The fine would come from untaxed RBE (Revenue Base Errosion) and a 1% strike rate for EU residents, plus the opportunity costs that there will be NO competition - well the fine has to be more like 8% to yield 4%, delayed n years in the courts, PV = more like 3% . If the lawyers streched the court case out 3 years, its like 1 %
Even less with a headline 'settllement'.

Its a no brainer: Ignore the EU - they are not serious,

Re:Fines are a matter for risk management (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46022511)

Its a no brainer: Ignore the EU - they are not serious,

If we look at past cases EU tends to step up the fines when nothing happens, not just one time but they continue to increase the fine until the matter is resolved.
The first fine/warning was at approximately 1,2 million dollar. This one is closer to a billion.
It is unlikely that the third strike would be approaching the trillion but if it is closer to ten billion then we are talking about 20% of the global turnover. Do you think Google wants to risk it? There is a point where it is cheaper to just comply with the law and since China managed to get Google to censor their searches it is pretty evident that this point is way before Google contemplates leaving the market.

There is also another side. In cases where EU doesn't have businesses or research facilities that are competitive with the rest of the world they are willing to push money that way to make sure that EU becomes more independent. If Google doesn't want to play ball it is likely that a subsidized competitor will show up, that is a permanent loss of their largest market and will hurt them way more than any ten digit fine.

Google doesn't want to admit... (1)

Eunuchswear (210685) | about 3 months ago | (#46021925)

... that "do no evil" has been revised.

The biggest stick that can be used against them isn't even cash - they are fighting tooth and nail against being forced to put a notice on their front page admitting wrongdoing.

Re:Google doesn't want to admit... (1)

LookIntoTheFuture (3480731) | about 3 months ago | (#46022043)

Google doesn't want to admit that "do no evil" has been revised.

Exactly. They are cashing in on the fact that most people think they are still "cool". To me, their slogan became a joke shortly after their IPO. After that, "do no evil" for the long term became an impossibility.

Re: Google doesn't want to admit... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46022217)

To me the change was Google+, where they force to use real name and publish you own profile picture.and this all by forcing to be used so you can USE their devices

Except the new fine won't apply to Google. (1)

tlambert (566799) | about 3 months ago | (#46021953)

Except the new fine won't apply to Google. Google was fined previously for changing the privacy policy with insufficient notification and explanation of the change, not because they were actually violating anything other than a notification requirement.

for your amusement (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46022095)

puhlease.. this is all just a show. How about people focus on bigger problems like large fines for banks and other companies when their systems are breached and so called "crackers" make off with peoples private information for Social Security numbers, CC info etc...

Why do they want to target Google? (1)

yuhong (1378501) | about 3 months ago | (#46022175)

Why do they want to target Google? What are the practical problems caused by the data collection?

Re:Why do they want to target Google? (1)

yuhong (1378501) | about 3 months ago | (#46022209)

That being said, I do think Vic Gundotra should probably be fired from Google.

Re:Why do they want to target Google? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46022267)

that's a good one, why don't you post all of your life facts, and even thoughts, etc. on the internet in real time then?
could it be because next time you need to find a job (after being fired when your current employer did not like something you said) other employers will look up your name and see they may not like why you got fired either?

Re:Why do they want to target Google? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46022631)

Google is used as an example here, they are not targeting google.

Ouch (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46022635)

Phew damn, at that rate the NSA will bankrupt Google in about 35 minuets.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...