Google stand could be good for business

That was the argument made by Google’s rivals in defending their decision to comply with the Justice Department subpoena.

“We did comply with their request for data in regards to helping protect children in a way that ensured we also protected the privacy of our customers,” a Microsoft spokeswoman said in an e-mailed statement. “We were able to share aggregated query data (not search results) that did not include any personally identifiable information at their request.”

But Google associate general counsel Nicole Wong said in a statement: "Google is not a party to this lawsuit and their demand for information overreaches.”

In a letter written in October and submitted with government court papers, Google attorney Ashok Ramani raises a laundry list of objections to the subpoena, saying it is “overbroad, unduly burdensome, vague and intended to harass.”

But the company’s reputation among its users is also a key concern, he said.

“Google’s acceding to the request would suggest that it is willing to reveal information about those who use its services,” Ramani wrote. “This is not a perception that Google can accept.”

Chris Hoofnagle, senior counsel for the Electronic Privacy Information Center, described the subpoena as a “dragnet search” that could open the door to “a bootstrapping investigation.”

“What’s disappointing is that so many other services did pony up the data,” said Hoofnagle. “I’m hoping that this incident will shine a light on the fact that so many companies are solicitous to law enforcement requests for data.”

Hoofnagle said he and other privacy advocates have no issue with the law enforcement officials asking for and receiving records of online activity when in “hot pursuit” of criminal suspects. Google and other Internet service providers routinely provide personal information in such cases.

And it is not clear whether the Justice Department could in fact act on any information it developed as a result of such a broad “dragnet” search, said Daniel Solove, an Associate Professor of Law at George Washington University Law School and author of “The Digital Person.”

But he said the demand was consistent with an erosion of Fourth Amendment rights as the government seems to be getting in the habit of going on “fishing expeditions” rather than specific searches permitted after probable cause has been proven before a court.

The Bush administration has come under fire from both Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill in recent weeks after revelations that it approved a National Security Agency program to track communications of U.S. citizens without prior court approval. program recently

“If we look at everyone we could probably find a lot of (crimes) going on,” said Solove. ... “But that's not how our system works.”

MORE FROM GADGETS

Gadgets Section Front

Sony opens up e-book Reader   Apple CEO's private matter a public concern It's taking time to 'grow' green PCs Latest and greatest in inexpensive tech 1,600-year-old version of Bible goes online Black market iPhones big in Russia, China Survey: Consumers steered to costlier TVs The market for skinny laptops gets fat Latest Mitch Albom treatise is online only Lighter laptops move to flash-based drives Gadgets Section Front   Add Gadgets headlines to your news reader: