Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Google Facing Tens of Millions of Dollars in Fines over Safari Privacy Circumvention
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Negotiation is sort of normal
The negotiation will be for a "I won't appeal the fine" deal; if the Feds tried to fine Google 10 billion dollars (insert echo chamber sound effect here), Google would appeal; so the Feds negotiate a fine that Google will pay right now without further lawyer enrichment.
If Safari users want to sue Google in civil court, and if there is a case to be made for money damages, I'm sure there are plenty of enterprising litigators out there who will do it. Expect to see their ads on CNN next to the various "bad drug" ads.
Here's a question:
If Google is allowed to "negotiate" with the Feds over how big their fine will be, why can't I negotiate with the CHP over how big my fine will be when I get a speeding ticket?
Edit: Ack! Power1080 beat me to it!
The negotiation will be for a "I won't appeal the fine" deal; if the Feds tried to fine Google 10 billion dollars (insert echo chamber sound effect here), Google would appeal; so the Feds negotiate a fine that Google will pay right now without further lawyer enrichment.
If Safari users want to sue Google in civil court, and if there is a case to be made for money damages, I'm sure there are plenty of enterprising litigators out there who will do it. Expect to see their ads on CNN next to the various "bad drug" ads.
Google is being fined for violating an agreement it made with the FTC, not for breaking the law. It's in the source article.
They do, Android users are ok with selling their souls to Google though
Actually, it doesn`t matter because Android users` web browsing is so low, Google had to find a way to make more money from iOS usage.
And why is that Google logo bigger than Macrumors` logo?
Can you cite any example that would enable such a thing? Apple could sue Google assuming they have grounds to prove civil damages, but here the damages are supposedly against the users, not Apple. Regarding a cease and desist letter, that would make perfect sense.
Yes. the burglar has commited a crime. But the landlord can still be sued for negligence. Both have consequences. I'm not suggesting Apple is/was negligent. I'm just saying that both parties COULD be "guilty"
It's easy to make claims like this with no proof on the internet, but do you have any examples of someone successfully winning a case against their landlord for something like this? Or do you just mean i can literally sue my landlord? If so i can sue anyone for anything. Whether the case has any merit is a different story.
Please provide a real world example if you can
Google shouldn't have exploited, that is standard ethics (not far removed from the newspaper phone hacking, just not done)...
Apple should have been notified of the exploit so that it could be patched... If Google chose not to inform Apple and exploited the vulnerability, then that makes them no better than the hackers that receive jail terms and those that authorised the exploit at Google should also be facing jail terms and Google's code of practice under scruitiny.
If Apple failed to even attempt to patch the issue after being informed (within a reasonable time) then Apple should be held accountable.
Apple should have been notified of the exploit so that it could be patched... If Google chose not to inform Apple and exploited the vulnerability, then that makes them no better than the hackers that receive jail terms and those that authorised the exploit at Google should also be facing jail terms and Google's code of practice under scruitiny.
If Apple failed to even attempt to patch the issue after being informed (within a reasonable time) then Apple should be held accountable.
Still a drop in the bucket.
Fines levied by the government should be so large that no one would even joke about doing something similar.
Fines levied by the government should be so large that no one would even joke about doing something similar.
So lets say the lock on my door is rusty and old...
By your logic it's my fault if somebody gets in my home rape and murder my family Death Wish style?
Google decided on getting by the USER's wish not to be tracked, for their own gain, they should be punished.
RE: Email
I find the Yahoo mail is better than Gmail. Yahoo has the ability to use folders, lots of options for flagging items for followup, spam, attachments, virus scanning, okay address book, okay calendars, plus works with reminders and notes.
If you are asking if you can set it up to work with an iPhone, Hotmail and Yahoo both work.
I find the Yahoo mail is better than Gmail. Yahoo has the ability to use folders, lots of options for flagging items for followup, spam, attachments, virus scanning, okay address book, okay calendars, plus works with reminders and notes.
If you are asking if you can set it up to work with an iPhone, Hotmail and Yahoo both work.
Unfortunately there is no free lunch and all the Google products are just that. You are trading your privacy for services that Google is providing. Honestly, I always try to steer clear from Google services since that company is shady as hell. If one needs to repeat a slogan like "Do no evil" then you probably have Skynet already up and running. Burn in hell Google and give them a billion dollar fine and maybe then they think twice about tracking consumers.
Apple patched it, and no Google did not inform them as far as i know
I was being sarcastic. Of course it's googles fault.
Software is not static and is never going to be perfect. There's always going to be things to fix and improve upon. To claim that Apple was lax in their security is oversimplifying the situation. I'm not defending Apple, but rather pointing out your uninformed viewpoint on this matter. Now, if Apple hadn't fixed the problem to this day, then you'd have an argument, but they fixed it, right?
Google intentionally exploited the hole. Apple didn't intentionally create the hole. See the difference here?
Nice try. It clearly says that the tenants asked the landlord multiple times to change the locks and he didn't. How is that comparable to Google actively exploiting a loophole, that Apple immediately patched once notified?
As I stated earlier - I don't think the money is the issue or purpose. The point is to get something on the books for legal precedent. And on top of that - there's bad press for Google (and for them to cease their actions).
I'd have to say your blanket faith in Google needs a reality check. Would someone that's not evil try to get in to your locked house from the back window you accidentally forgot to close?
And yes that would your mistake, but obviously not justification for someone to break-in.
EDIT: You definitely need to put "/sarcasm" in there somewhere. Just try re-reading your own post as someone who can't hear the inflections in your speech and you can see why we're confused.
I'm surprised. I thought Google was a pretty good company. Apparently, I was mistaken. That fine is like me getting a parking ticket hahaha! That'll sure teach em.