FedGovs want Google Data - UPDATED


Fishing despite the law. And of course, it's "for the children."
Pay attention to this one.

The Bush administration on Wednesday asked a federal judge to order Google to turn over a broad range of material from its closely guarded databases.

The move is part of a government effort to revive an Internet child protection law struck down two years ago by the U.S. Supreme Court. The law was meant to punish online pornography sites that make their content accessible to minors. The government contends it needs the Google data to determine how often pornography shows up in online searches.

In court papers filed in U.S. District Court in San Jose, Justice Department lawyers revealed that Google has refused to comply with a subpoena issued last year for the records, which include a request for 1 million random Web addresses and records of all Google searches from any one-week period.

The Mountain View-based search and advertising giant opposes releasing the information on a variety of grounds, saying it would violate the privacy rights of its users and reveal company trade secrets, according to court documents.

Nicole Wong, an associate general counsel for Google, said the company will fight the government's effort ``vigorously.''

``Google is not a party to this lawsuit, and the demand for the information is overreaching,'' Wong said.

The case worries privacy advocates, given the vast amount of information Google and other search engines know about their users.

``This is exactly the kind of case that privacy advocates have long feared,'' said Ray Everett-Church, a South Bay privacy consultant. ``The idea that these massive databases are being thrown open to anyone with a court document is the worst-case scenario. If they lose this fight, consumers will think twice about letting Google deep into their lives.''

This is the telling paragraph. Emphasis added.

The government argues that it needs the information as it prepares to once again defend the constitutionality of the Child Online Protection Act in a federal court in Pennsylvania. The law was struck down in 2004 because it was too broad and could prevent adults from accessing legal porn sites.

Get that? The law has been struck down. There is no basis for the subpoena. The sole purpose of the subpoena is to get proof to reinstate the law already invalidated by the court. There is no proof of harm. There is absolutely NOTHING except the desire of government agents to wade through the raw data LOOKING for something that MIGHT be harm.

The previous court decision said that the FedGovs have to PROVE that the law does not violate the First Amendment.

Under the justification for this subpoena, the Feds might want to remove all non-governmental vehicles from the roads on the chance that there might be fatal car accidents. Or move to restrict gun ownership on the grounds that there might be injuries or deaths. Or prevent doctors from prescribing "too much" medication on the grounds that it might encourage addiction and dependency.

Oh wait, they already do those last two, don't they?

Don't read too much into this because it is the Bush Administration. Porn is an easy target, and Democrats can be just as puritanical if they think they will reap political rewards. It's not a party thing, it is a government thing. The only realistic solution is to reduce the power and size of government. Make exceptions so government can go after the things you find objectionable, and soon government will go after the things you think should be protected.

If the government doesn't trust you, why should you trust the government?

— NeoWayland

Posted: Thu - January 19, 2006 at 04:57 PM  Tag


 ◊  ◊   ◊  ◊ 

Random selections from NeoWayland's library


Pagan Vigil "Because LIBERTY demands more than just black or white"
© 2005 - 2009 All Rights Reserved