I don't see Google doing that. Hell Apple won't even unlock a phone for the FBI after a mass shooting.
In the Apple encryption case, the FBI sought to compel Apple to create new software to break their existing encryption. The files may have physically been stored on an Apple server, but Apple did not have access to them, and would have had to hack their own systems/compromise the security of their encryption to comply. This is a much more run-of-the-mill warrant provided on a service provider to produce records in the service provider's possession. Google has access to all of the information being compelled by the warrant. They don't have to hack their own software to comply with the warrant. Their terms of service and privacy policy explicitly state: When Google shares your information We do not share your personal information with companies, organizations, or individuals outside of Google except in the following cases: ... For legal reasons We will share personal information outside of Google if we have a good-faith belief that access, use, preservation, or disclosure of the information is reasonably necessary to: Meet any applicable law, regulation, legal process, or enforceable governmental request. We share information about the number and type of requests we receive from governments in our Transparency Report.
It looks like about they only produce data in about 60% of requests. I think 12 months of full access to everything he's done is a bit broad. Percentage of requests where data was produced This chart shows the percentage of requests that resulted in the production of some data to the requesting entity. We review each request we receive to make sure it satisfies applicable legal requirements and Google's policies. If we feel that a request is overly broad—asking for too much information given the circumstances—we seek to narrow it. In certain cases we'll push back regardless of whether the user decides to challenge it legally. legal process, or enforceable governmental request Like other technology and communications companies, Google regularly receives requests from governments and courts around the world to disclose user data. Respect for the privacy and security of data you store with Google underpins our approach to complying with these legal requests. Our legal team reviews each and every request, regardless of type, and we frequently push back when a request appears to be overly broad or doesn’t follow the correct process. Learn more in our Transparency Report.
It's not a request (for which Google complied and produced at least some data in over 80% of requests originating in the United States), it's a signed warrant compelling disclosure which already inherently comes with a judge determining that there is a sufficient basis to require the records to be turned over. At most, they may seek to narrow production, but there is no scenario in which they hand over nothing like Apple.
Not trying to be an asshole, but I’d love to read a post of yours that says “oh, I didn’t realize...” Just to know you’re capable.
Right, my original comment was the about how broad the warrant is. A day, a week, even a month, ok. A full year of full access to all emails, pictures, and files? Seems a but broad to me. I'll admit the Apple comparison was off.
Google employee here. They will most likely turn over the data. Pushbacks have occurred but they mostly center around free access to peoples accounts or IT infrastructure instances. Turning over search history etc on court order happens quite a bit.
I’m not an attorney, but from reviewing evidence files, I have never seen pushback from Google/Facebook/Telecom companies when there is a court order for data they have.
a sex charge. It is not unusual at all, and i can rattle off example after example. If they have the data and there is a warrant they’ll turn it over.
Like I said last night, a couple days, a week, or even a month seems reasonable. Full access to his entire data for a year seems overly intrusive. Maybe I'm wrong. If they hand it over today, I'll say that.
you didn’t see google doing that a google employee himself says they will most likely do it and they turn that stuff over all the time cmon....one time for the audience
At that point I'd probably want to see something showing they had reason to believe he'd been planning it that long. I just don't think being investigated for a crime means cops should have access to all of your personal data going back to birth.
Didn't say that. Just saying 12 months seems arbitrary if they don't have a reason to think he's been planning it that long.
That’s the judge’s determination to make - not google’s. Google is only going to withhold information they have if turning it over creates some legal exposure for them. They don’t care about acting like your defense counsel.
legal process, or enforceable governmental request Like other technology and communications companies, Google regularly receives requests from governments and courts around the world to disclose user data. Respect for the privacy and security of data you store with Google underpins our approach to complying with these legal requests. Our legal team reviews each and every request, regardless of type, and we frequently push back when a request appears to be overly broad or doesn’t follow the correct process. Learn more in our Transparency Report.
Yes, they review each request to make sure it’s lawful before complying. If they didn’t do that, they’d get into legal trouble themselves.
dbl is arguing with lawyers and google employees on this and is still dumb enough to think he is right