BEST OF INTENTIONS
(UPDATE: Follow-up NY Times story on this post's topic)
Danny Sullivan of Search Engine Watch has done a great job on the "Government subpoenas Google and other search engines for one week's surfing data" story. His headline this evening (via memeorandum) says it all:
"Bush Administration Demands Search Data; Google Says No; AOL, MSN & Yahoo Said Yes"
Some good discussion can be found on the issue on memeorandum, with a concise commentary provided by John Battelle:
"As we move our data to the servers at Amazon.com, Hotmail.com,
Yahoo.com, and Gmail.com, we are making an implicit bargain, one
that the public at large is either entirely content with, or, more likely,
one that most have not taken much to heart.That bargain is this: we trust you to not do evil things with our
information. We trust that you will keep it secure, free from unlaw-
ful government or private search and seizure, and under our control
at all times.We understand that you might use our data in aggregate
to provide us better and more useful services, but we trust that you
will not identify individuals personally through our data, nor use
our personal data in a manner that would violate our own sense of
privacy and freedom."
Although the government request in THIS instance does not seem to invade specific individual privacy rights (as Yahoo! has maintained), the larger issue is one of the "slippery slope".
As I read my email on Google's Gmail with sponsored ads on the right on the VERY subject of the emails I'm reading, I must admit this issue does give me pause.
Most mainstream Internet users are probably OK with trading some of privacy by trusting Google, but it's a VERY fragile trust at this EARLY stage of living more and more of their life online.
And what the government is doing in this instance, IS NOT helping.
The situation is reminiscent of a time when Washington actually took the WISE step almost a decade ago by declaring a temporary moratorium on sales tax on commerce online (later popularized as "e-commerce").
It was justified PARTLY by the notion that it was important to SHELTER the growth of the fragile trust in transacting over this new medium by mainstream consumers.
This is WISHFUL THINKING, but here goes.
In much the same way as above, it may make sense for the government to declare a SELF-IMPOSED moratorium on giving into the temptation to subpoena GENERAL user data from Internet companies, no matter how worthy the broader goal may be. Of course, this WOULD NOT apply to specific criminal investigations.
It may provide some breathing room for the TRUST mechanisms to grow more robust on the Internet.
Like I said, wishful thinking.
And I thought I had optimistic moments! ;)
Posted by: Warner Crocker | Thursday, January 19, 2006 at 09:30 PM