Inside Google

Google In Court Over Books Deal

Maggie Shiels

Search giant Google is facing its opponents in a New York court over long-delayed plans to create the world’s largest online library. Critics say the pact would hand the search giant a monopoly over online books sales. Some 26 interested parties will be given time to outline any objections. "This case is the key showdown. It’s high-noon time in front of a
judge," said John Simpson of Consumer Watchdog, one of the groups that
objects to the settlement. "I do think all the books in the world should be digitised, but I think
it is completely wrong to give one huge company control of that huge
database and this is a very, very important matter," Mr Simpson said.

Google Buzz ‘Breaks Privacy Laws’

Maggie Shiels

A leading privacy group has urged US regulators to investigate Google’s
new social networking service Buzz, one week after its launch.

The Consumer Watchdog, an advocacy group, said it was not surprised by this stumble. "This case illustrates a lot about Google’s corporate culture where a
company is run by computer scientists whose operating method is don’t
ask for permission when you can always ask for forgiveness," said the
organisation’s John Simpson.

Google updates Buzz social-networking service amid privacy concerns

Jessica Guynn

The Internet giant has tweaked the sign-up process to make the
opt-out option clearer and made it easier to block people from
following users.

"Google shows continued tone deafness to the very important privacy
rights of consumers," John Simpson of Consumer Watchdog said.

Press Release

Next Chapter In Digital Book Deal: Google vs. DOJ

CONTACT: Michael Liedtke

Google seems to want Judge Chin to be the man making the decision, said John
Simpson of Consumer Watchdog, one of the opponents scheduled to speak
in court next week. "Google has decided it’s longer willing to negotiate with Justice on
this one," Simpson said. "They want to negotiate with the judge
instead."

Press Release

AdMob May Win Big Even As Privacy Debate Rages

CONTACT: James Temple

It’s these highly personalized capabilities that raise the hackles of
privacy advocates, however. They raise a host of questions about "how
the data is used and manipulated without the consumer understanding,"
said John Simpson of Consumer Watchdog. Those concerns are only
heightened by the proposed acquisition by Google, which he said could
bore deeper into personal information by coupling its rich user
databases with AdMob’s.

Press Release

Justice Department Objects to Revised Google Books Settlement

CONTACT: Wire Reports

The Department of Justice filed a statement of interest February 4 saying that that despite “substantial progress”  it still had objections to the proposed settlement of lawsuits challenging Google’s Book Search project, noting that the agreement continued to raise copyright, antitrust, and class certification issues. Consumer Watchdog, which had filed a brief opposing the settlement, praised the Justice Department’s stance. “The Department of Justice should
be commended for standing firm in opposing this private deal that
unfairly benefits the narrow agenda of one company,” said John M.
Simpson, a consumer advocate with the nonprofit group. “The DOJ filing
and the outpouring of other briefs from around the world opposing the
amended settlement, such as the one filed by Consumer Watchdog, make it
almost certain Judge Denny Chin will reject the deal.”

Press Release

US DoJ Dissatisfied With Google Book Deal

CONTACT: Chris Nuttall

San Francisco, CA — The US Department of Justice on Thursday said it was still not satisfied with an agreement on digitising books made between Google, authors and publishers, despite “substantial progress” on amendments to the settlement. Consumer Watchdog, the consumer group, welcomed the DoJ’s objections to the deal. “Google offered only minimal amendments to its original flawed deal and
the key problems remain,” said John Simpson, a spokesman. “The DoJ filing and the outpouring of other briefs from around the
world opposing the amended settlement make it almost certain [Judge
Chin] will reject the deal.”

Press Release

Justice Says Revised Google Books Deal Still Problematic

CONTACT: Wire Reports

The Justice Department announced late Thursday that it still has problems with a proposed settlement between the publishing industry and Google over the firm’s plans for developing a global online library, CongressDaily reported. In a statement, the Open Book Alliance, which opposes the settlement,
applauded the Justice Department’s filing saying, it will "help to
preserve competition, promote innovation and protect the public
interest. The Department of Justice has made it crystal clear that the
proposal before the court is overreaching and cannot be approved." The
alliance members include Amazon.com, Microsoft and Yahoo, as well as
some library, writer and publishing groups. John Simpson with Consumer
Watchdog also praised the department in a statement for "standing firm
in opposing this private deal that unfairly benefits the narrow agenda
of one company" and predicted the court will reject it.

Press Release

Justice Dept Says Google Books Deal Troubled

CONTACT: Diane Bartz

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Changes that Google Inc and the Authors Guild made to an ambitious plan to create a massive online library were inadequate because they fail to address antitrust and copyright concerns, the U.S. Justice Department said on Thursday. Critics of the deal have been a varied group that includes Yahoo
Inc, Amazon Inc, Microsoft Inc, the National Writers Union and Consumer
Watchdog.

Press Release

Feds Still Troubled By Google’s Digital Book Deal

CONTACT: Michael Liedtke

SAN FRANCISCO, CA — The U.S. Justice Department still thinks a proposal to give Google the digital rights to millions of hard-to-find books threatens to stifle competition and undermine copyright laws, despite revisions aimed at easing those concerns. Consumer Watchdog, one of the groups fighting the settlement, applauded
the Justice Department for taking a stand against a deal "that unfairly
benefits the narrow agenda of one company."