Feeds

Privacy group downplays Google Buzz cash grab

Unfair that outfits against Mountain View got nada, says EPIC boss

Choosing a cloud hosting partner with confidence

A US web advocacy outfit has downplayed reports that suggest it is pursing $1.75m over a class action settlement between privacy groups and Google, following Mountain View's social network gaffe with Buzz.

The Electronic Privacy Information Center's executive director, Marc Rotenberg, told The Register that "money isn't the main point" in the objection lodged in a California district court earlier this week.

"The Google lawyers did not want funds to go to the organisations that were actually standing up to the company on the Buzz matter," he told us, "and that's the main point here."

Groups that did benefit from the funds included the American Civil Liberties Union, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the Brookings Institution.

Outside of the filing, seen by El Reg, EPIC hasn't made any further public statement about its beef over the class action lawsuit settlement with Google.

On Wednesday 30 March, it applauded a separate settlement between the Federal Trade Commission and Google over Buzz, which stated that the web kingpin would be subjected to a biennial privacy audit for the next 20 years.

EPIC, which brought the original complaint about Buzz to the FTC, described that move as "far-reaching," at the same time as it was filing its objections against the class action suit settlement in court.

"It is the most significant privacy decision by the Commission to date. For internet users, it should lead to higher privacy standards and better protection for personal data," said EPIC.

Reuters noted today that EPIC had requested $1.75m from the settlement, after the group represented eight online privacy organisations in its court filing earlier this week.

A separate brief written on behalf of three private plaintiff objectors by lawyer Joshua Furman show that other class members opposed the settlement for similar reasons to EPIC's.

"There are very few national organisations truly focused on online privacy, and fewer still that play a significant role in public policy and consumer protection actions directed at protecting privacy rights from commercial—not governmental—interests," reads Furman's filing.

"While both industry-funded and non-industry-funded groups are potentially worthy candidates for funding many reasons, we believe it is imperative for the purposes of the settlement and the benefit of the class that organisations which typically do not receive substantial industry funding be apportioned the bulk of the funding in this case."

In November last year, Google contacted all its Gmail users via an email message in which it confirmed it had reached a settlement in a lawsuit over its privacy-lite Buzz social network that was bolted onto everyone's mailboxes by default in early 2010.

"Shortly after its launch, we heard from a number of people who were concerned about privacy. In addition, we were sued by a group of Buzz users and recently reached a settlement in this case," Google wrote at the time.

It added that some money from a $8.5m fund would be used to distribute awards to internet privacy groups. Additionally, Google confirmed the cash would be used to pay the lawyers and the people who sued the company.

Google unleashed Buzz in February 2010. At launch it automatically exposed users' most frequent Gmail contacts to the public interwebs. Users were given the option to hide the list from the public view, but many complained that switching the social network off was tricky as a checkbox to do so wasn't prominently displayed in their mailbox.

Days later, Google shifted the location of the checkbox in an effort to silence the complaints. It also changed the way Buzz handled user contacts. But those tweaks came too late for some, who responded in litigious fashion. ®

Security for virtualized datacentres

More from The Register

next story
Microsoft to bake Skype into IE, without plugins
Redmond thinks the Object Real-Time Communications API for WebRTC is ready to roll
Microsoft promises Windows 10 will mean two-factor auth for all
Sneak peek at security features Redmond's baking into new OS
Mozilla: Spidermonkey ATE Apple's JavaScriptCore, THRASHED Google V8
Moz man claims the win on rivals' own benchmarks
FTDI yanks chip-bricking driver from Windows Update, vows to fight on
Next driver to battle fake chips with 'non-invasive' methods
PEAK APPLE: iOS 8 is least popular Cupertino mobile OS in all of HUMAN HISTORY
'Nerd release' finally staggers past 50 per cent adoption
DEATH by PowerPoint: Microsoft warns of 0-day attack hidden in slides
Might put out patch in update, might chuck it out sooner
Ubuntu 14.10 tries pulling a Steve Ballmer on cloudy offerings
Oi, Windows, centOS and openSUSE – behave, we're all friends here
Was ist das? Eine neue Suse Linux Enterprise? Ausgezeichnet!
Version 12 first major-number Suse release since 2009
prev story

Whitepapers

Why cloud backup?
Combining the latest advancements in disk-based backup with secure, integrated, cloud technologies offer organizations fast and assured recovery of their critical enterprise data.
A strategic approach to identity relationship management
ForgeRock commissioned Forrester to evaluate companies’ IAM practices and requirements when it comes to customer-facing scenarios versus employee-facing ones.
Reg Reader Research: SaaS based Email and Office Productivity Tools
Read this Reg reader report which provides advice and guidance for SMBs towards the use of SaaS based email and Office productivity tools.
Storage capacity and performance optimization at Mizuno USA
Mizuno USA turn to Tegile storage technology to solve both their SAN and backup issues.
The hidden costs of self-signed SSL certificates
Exploring the true TCO for self-signed SSL certificates, including a side-by-side comparison of a self-signed architecture versus working with a third-party SSL vendor.