Government wants Google search data

[scottyz]

The Bush administration on Wednesday asked a federal judge to order Google to turn over a broad range of material from its closely guarded databases.

The move is part of a government effort to revive an Internet child protection law struck down two years ago by the U.S. Supreme Court. The law was meant to punish online pornography sites that make their content accessible to minors. The government contends it needs the Google data to determine how often pornography shows up in online searches.

In court papers filed in U.S. District Court in San Jose, Justice Department lawyers revealed that Google has refused to comply with a subpoena issued last year for the records, which include a request for 1 million random Web addresses and records of all Google searches from any one-week period.

The government argues that it needs the information as it prepares to once again defend the constitutionality of the Child Online Protection Act in a federal court in Pennsylvania. The law was struck down in 2004 because it was too broad and could prevent adults from accessing legal porn sites.

However, the Supreme Court invited the government to either come up with a less drastic version of the law or go to trial to prove that the statute does not violate the First Amendment and is the only viable way to combat child porn.

As a result, government lawyers said in court papers they are developing a defense of the 1998 law based on the argument that it is far more effective than software filters in protecting children from porn. To back that claim, the government has subpoenaed search engines to develop a factual record of how often Web users encounter online porn and how Web searches turn up material they say is ``harmful to minors.''

The government indicated that other, unspecified search engines have agreed to release the information, but not Google.

http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/13657386.htm

Those unspecified search engines are Yahoo and MSN. This law they're trying to pass was already ruled unconstitutional yet they're still at it. They say they want this data to determine how many minors look at porn, but there is no way to actually know who is looking at the porn. What they claim they want such data for doesn't seem realistic. They could just tell parents to watch what their kids do online.... but that wouldn't trample on anyones rights. :doh

 

[Billo_Really]

All I want from government is to stay the hell out of my daily life.

 

[tecoyah]

I work for a board that has....uh....a few intersting forums. We have a strict age requirement for membership. But we do not rely on this alone.We have structured the site in such a way that thru Tiered access we can pretty much hold anyone in limbo indefinately, and forbid access to the more sensative parts of the board. We go out of our way to prevent minors from looking at prOn, and look for flags to weed out the preemies before they see a single nipple.
There are many ways to find the underage on the web.....and if indeed , we can be so skilled at finding them, without a huge database, using limited resources, and a staff of volunteer moderators....Why do they need this information?

 

[ngdawg]

All I want from government is to stay the hell out of my daily life.

Ditto. I don't need some philandering, war-mongering , bible belt politicians playing mom to my kids.
What happened to the Republican philosophy of 'less government' in the last 10 years?
I think it's a shame the other search engines acquiesced to this inane 'request'-glad I don't use them at all. I find this akin to the news a while back of those FBI agents whose job it is to sit and watch porn all day-I don't get the point of any of this at all. Authorities seem to do a pretty thorough job of catching child pornographers, internet stalkers and the ilk-it would be impossible to be one step ahead of them, but when they come down on the low-lifes, it's usually in a big way, busting entire groups of people at a time. I'd be willing to state they didn't get busted as a result of those FBI porn watchers. Many cases, they were turned in by someone else not in law enforcement.
The only thing Google does not have is a parental control feature-anyone can change the search mods.
Sites such as Myspace, Deviant Art, etc. are the same way(no parental controls,etc). Are they next? Myspace. com, by the way, is owned by the media mogul, Rupert Murdoch. Any bets he will never see such a 'request' come down?

 

[jfuh]

Ditto. I don't need some philandering, war-mongering , bible belt politicians playing mom to my kids.
What happened to the Republican philosophy of 'less government' in the last 10 years?
I think it's a shame the other search engines acquiesced to this inane 'request'-glad I don't use them at all. I find this akin to the news a while back of those FBI agents whose job it is to sit and watch porn all day-I don't get the point of any of this at all. Authorities seem to do a pretty thorough job of catching child pornographers, internet stalkers and the ilk-it would be impossible to be one step ahead of them, but when they come down on the low-lifes, it's usually in a big way, busting entire groups of people at a time. I'd be willing to state they didn't get busted as a result of those FBI porn watchers. Many cases, they were turned in by someone else not in law enforcement.
The only thing Google does not have is a parental control feature-anyone can change the search mods.
Sites such as Myspace, Deviant Art, etc. are the same way(no parental controls,etc). Are they next? Myspace. com, by the way, is owned by the media mogul, Rupert Murdoch. Any bets he will never see such a 'request' come down?

Seriously, this lawsuit is a complete waste of tax payer money. I can only assume they really want google in so as to possibly improove thier wiretapping capacity lol.
Were I a parent, I don't need government telling me how to teach my kids, I'll set my own fliters and blocks on my computer or have my own "big brother" lock on such things. This is just a rediculous lawsuit that the administration is using to control more of our daily lives.
Keep it simple, the 1st admendment, enough said.

 

[stsburns]

http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/13657386.htm

Those unspecified search engines are Yahoo and MSN. This law they're trying to pass was already ruled unconstitutional yet they're still at it. They say they want this data to determine how many minors look at porn, but there is no way to actually know who is looking at the porn. What they claim they want such data for doesn't seem realistic. They could just tell parents to watch what their kids do online.... but that wouldn't trample on anyones rights. :doh

Even I would like that data but its not like someone is going to sell it to me or anything, /wink /wink. :lol: Personally I would only be interested in their search engine source code.

 

[Dratsaba]

Heres where you have to ask yourself: Is it possible for a government to make the transformation from a democracy to a dictatorship without baby steps?

 

[stsburns]

Heres where you have to ask yourself: Is it possible for a government to make the transformation from a democracy to a dictatorship without baby steps?

And you can you name some current dictatorships that can compare to American Democracy? Its just a question you don't have to answer it.

 

[Desmosthenes]

I agree! Why should the government try to grab information from google? They're prodding into business that isn't there's, it's the public's, and google's. It's quite unconstitutional, and it should be rejected. I don't think it's right that they're getting into this kind of stuff. If they get into popular search engines like that, they should get into others too, especially the minor one's, because it's kind of obvious that they aren't getting into it just to see whhich minor's look at porn