Meanwhile, the European Commission has decided to launch anti-monopoly investigations into Google’s search engine and advertising search services. The reporter learned from Microsoft's official blog, that following Google's rapid expansion, an increasing number of small and large companies have begun filing lawsuits against Google. The lawsuits are related to every segment of the market that Google is involved in.
Some lawsuits reveal the tough stance taken by Google in relevant markets and some lawsuits reflect secrets behind Google's business operations. Other lawsuits are related to antitrust issues. What Google products have suffered from lawsuits? Why did these products merit lawsuits?
 | |
| How could lawsuit and criticism-distressed Google still boast of "doing no evil" |
"Offensive" product No. 1: Photos and videos
Groups offended: Parents and Internet regulators of various countries
Three Google executives in Italy were prosecuted after Google released a video on youtube.com, which is owned by Google, in which a disabled child was bullied – an autistic child was hit and insulted by 4 classmates on their school's campus. Google claimed in court that it just provided an Internet platform and assumes no obligation to check the content. Google has used similar excuses after being required to check pornography-related content in China.
It is worth noting that when Google claims its innocence, it is repeating the same tactic, hoping to turn a commercial criminal case into a political event. It has even urged U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to impose pressure on Italy. This tends to make people think of the "Google's possible exit from China" event that has yet to be settled.
Li Siyi, deputy director of the Institute of Journalism and Media under the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS), said that every country around the world has an information censorship system, particularly the censorship of content relating to terrorism and child pornography. Google is skilled at using the media to protect itself, but all the countries will not compromise when it come to the cases involved with such content. Even the U.S., where Google is headquartered, does not permit the free transmission of certain information in light of security. Such information includes information on national security, territory integrity and religious harmony as well as ill information that may hurt children's physical and mental health.
Analysts believe that this is the first case that a video sharing service has been convicted by a court because of a video posted by users. The conviction by the Italian court has a far-reaching impact on the development of the Internet industry, because it not only will likely change the business model of mainstream video sharing websites, but may even also change the industry’s understanding of the Internet.
"Offensive" product No. 2: news, videos and maps
Groups offended: the media, websites of various kinds and antitrust authorities
Google's products, such as news, videos and maps are all information service products, and the information is gleaned from media and websites around the world. These search service products offered by Google are greatly welcomed by users. However, Google's money-making strategy of "obtaining advertisement resources by using information free of charge" has led to complaints and alertness among information suppliers.
Newspapers and magazines in Germany have blamed Google, saying that Google stole their readers by using unfair competitive methods. German map websites claimed that Google has destroyed their rural markets. The American Columbia Broadcasting System (CBS) has removed its videos from Google's YouTube website. The American Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has also required Google to take some videos of the Academy Award ceremony off its YouTube website… Obviously, we can see that these information suppliers are no longer willing to allow Google a free ride.
The increasing influence of Google also offended some antitrust authorities. These authorities worry that Google is abusing its dominant position on the Internet. What Google is doing is that it always uses the headline news or the brief descriptions of the news published on other news websites unless these websites clearly state the news cannot be re-published. In addition, an Internet engineer disclosed that Google might use filtering software to eliminate some websites from relevant search results, and that would make the websites suffer commercial losses.
"Offensive" product No. 3: Gmail's Buzz
Groups offended: common users
On February 11, Iran Telecoms announced that Iran would permanently suspend Google's Gmail service and launch a national e-mail service. On the same day, Google launched its Buzz service. As soon as Buzz, a service which is quite similar to the micro-blogging website Twitter, was launched, it quickly began to receive criticism. The reasons are 3 automatic settings. First, Google automatically registers its Gmail users for the Buzz service. In other words, Gmail users already have this service before they apply for it or choose to use it. Second, Buzz automatically creates a Buzz friend list for a user using names in the user's Gmail contacts list. Third, Buzz automatically sends the latest contents on a user's Buzz micro-blog to the e-mail boxes of the user's Gmail friends. All of these settings make it possible that users' private information could possibly be leaked. On February 16, the U.S. Electronic Privacy Information Centre announced that the Buzz service had violated Federal Consumer Protection Laws.
After using Buzz, a woman angrily wrote that she used Gmail to communicate mostly with her mother and boyfriend, but the person who was next to them was her ex-husband. Google's Buzz automatically set that they (including her ex-husband) could see some of her private information, but only she and her boyfriend had the right to read the information.
"It does not matter whether users are active on Buzz. Many claim that Google's real purpose is to learn what you are chatting about or watching, to observe the messages you write so that they will have all of your things at their fingertips. After doing so, Google can do a lot, including pushing advertising and personalized searches," said a technologist from a dot-com company.
"Google keeps and analyzes all users' search records, IP addresses, and preferences. Maybe some rabid technology admirers think that Google stores the information just to provide more personalized and considerate service, but I care more about the security of personal information," said Zhang Lei, a college student.
"Offensive" product No. 4: digital library
The offended: writers and publishers
Google Digital Library has enraged a large number of writers and publishers in many countries.
Google unilaterally quit negotiations with the Chinese Written Works Copyright Society January 12, causing a dilemma for both sides. It was also in big trouble in the U.S., because 15 Indian writers and publishers, as well as 2 copyright protection organizations, have filed lawsuits collectively in a U.S. court against Google's settlement agreement on digital books. Before the Indians brought in their objections, a large number of writers, publishers and other organizations from many countries across the world had already submitted their documents to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against the revised settlement agreement, and the court decided to indefinitely postpone a decision on whether to allow Google to ultimately carry out the digital library project.
Furthermore, Google Digital Library Project has raised wide concerns over cultural security in many countries that would prefer to build their own digital libraries. For example, after the launch of European Digital Library, Japan and France followed to build national digital library. Germany also officially launched the German Digital Library Project, and the digital library, involving more than 30,000 libraries and museums, is expected to be put into use this year.
Google's settlement agreement, which allows the company to scan and make available millions of books online and induce copyright owners to accept the agreement via a "waiver of copyright" clause, is a serious violation of international copyright protection laws. "It is absurd, unconscionable, and illegal that anyone can copy what they want from copyrighted works without permission, and then ask the copyright owner to give up the right, but that is exactly what the autocratic Google has been doing so far," writers said.
3 comments:
Don’t do what they say, do as they do! Those who can do take all. Those who can't do, lose all
In another worlds, those who do what they say, lose all!
Is Google autocratic or democratic?
Post a Comment