Evading Sovereign Accountability is How Google Works

Google is arguing in the UK’s High Court that it is not subject to UK data protection law, in a privacy lawsuit that alleges Google bypassed users’ Safari privacy settings to secretly track their activity. The UK’s Information Commissioner has petitioned the court to ensure that Google is subject to UK data protection law.

In a nutshell, Google is defending its secret collection of British citizens’ private information without their knowledge or permission, by claiming British citizens have no sovereign right to sue Google for Google’s invasion of their privacy in the UK.

The Goobris here would be remarkable if it was an isolated incident.

Sadly however, this heads-or-tails, Google-wins approach is really How Google Works.

Five More Examples of Google Evading Sovereign Accountability

1. Right to Be Forgotten: Concerning Europe High Court’s Right to Be Forgotten ruling, “adirector in the European Commission's justice department has accused Google of being 'passive-aggressive' towards EU data protection rules,” per The Telegraph, in part because Google encourages users to evade the Court’s decision by using America’s Google.com for their searches, and because Google characterizes the ruling as censorship.
2. Tax Evasion: Per The Sunday Times,a “former Google UK exec alleges [Google] misrepresented sales to avoid paying taxes; and“Although Google’s London sales staff would negotiate and sign contracts with British customers, and cash was paid into a UK bank account, deals were technically booked through its Dublin office to minimise its [tax] liabilities here.”
3. Privacy Policy: Google refused EU data protection authorities’ request to delay implementation of its new privacy policy to determine if it complied with EU law. Google also did not fully cooperate with EU data protection authorities’ investigation of the matter, per the CNIL.
4. UK Street View WiSpy: The UK Information Commissioner had to reopen its investigation of Google’s Street View WiFi snooping without consent, when it learned, from the U.S. FCC Street View investigation, that it had been misled to shut down the UK investigation prematurely, per The Telegraph.
5. Google Search Competition Case: In three negotiated settlement proposals, Google would only agree to a settlement where: Google was not ruled dominant despite the EC’s findings of 90% search share; Google did not have to admit any wrongdoing despite the EC’s four findings of dominance abuse; Google could continue the conduct that the EC had found to be illegal; Google would pay no fine; and the EC would promise to shut down any Google search investigation for five years.  

In short, Google routinely attempts, and often succeeds, in evading sovereign accountability for its serial bad acts that violate sovereign laws.

It’s how Google works.

Note: If one wants more evidence and examples of Google’s pattern of sovereign unaccountability, beyond the five timely, pertinent and verifiable examples discussed above, please see the copious evidence below in the 49-part Google Unaccountability Series. The evidence is not on Google’s side.

***       

Google Unaccountability Series 

Part 0: Google's Poor & Defiant Settlement Record [5-1-12] 

Part 1: Why Google Thinks It Is Above the Law [4-17-12] 

Part 2: Top Ten Untrue Google Stories [5-8-12] 

Part 3: Google's Growing Record of Obstruction of Justice [6-21-12]

Part 4: Why FTC's $22.5m Privacy Fine is Faux Accountability [7-12-12]

Part 5: Google's Culture of Unaccountability: In Their Own Words [8-1-12]

Part 6: Google Mocks the FTC's Ineffectual Privacy & Antitrust Enforcement [8-10-12]

Part 7: An FTC Googleopoly Get Out of Jail Free Card? [8-30-12]

Part 8: Top Lessons to Learn for Google Antitrust Enforcers [9-14-12] 

Part 9: Google Mocks EU and FTC in Courting Yahoo Again [9-26-12]

Part 10: FTC-Google Antitrust: The Obvious Case of Consumer Harm [11-25-12]

Part 11: Why FTC Can't Responsibly End Google Search Bias Antitrust Investigation [11-27-12]

Part 12: Oversight Questions for FTC's Handling of Google Antitrust Probe [11-30-12]

Part 13: Courts Not FTC Should Decide on Google Practices (The Hill Op-ed) [12-10-12]

Part 14: Troubling Irregularities Mount in FTC Handling of Google Investigation [12-17-12]

Part 15: Top Ten Unanswered Questions on FTC-Google Outcome [1-3-14]

Part 16: Top Takeaways from FTC's Google Antitrust Decisions [1-7-13]

Part 17: Google's Global Antitrust Rap Sheet [1-31-13]

Part 18: Google's Privacy Words vs. its Anti-privacy Deeds [3-8-13]

Part 19: Google's Privacy Rap Sheet Updated - Fact-checking Google's Privacy Claims [3-13-13]

Part 20: DOJ & FTC Report Cards [4-12-13]

Part 21: The Evidence Google Bamboozled EU Competition Authorities [4-19-13]

Part 22: EU-Google: Too Powerful to Prosecute? Problems with Enabling Google [5-1-13]

Part 23: Google's proposed EU Search Bias Remedies: a Satire [5-17-14]

Part 24: Google's Antitrust Rap Sheet Updated [5-27-13]

Part 25: Is This the Track Record of a Trustworthy Company? See Google's Rap Sheet [6-6-13]

Part 26: Top Questions as DOJ-Google Criminal Prosecution Deadline Approaches [7-12-14]

Part 27: The Evidence Google Violated the DOJ Non-Prosecution Agreement [8-8-13]

Part 28: Implications of EU Ruling Google Abused its Search Dominance [9-27-13]

Part 29: Google-YouAd is a Deceptive and Unfair Business Practice [10-24-13]

Part 30: EU's Google Antitrust Problems Not Going Away [12-16-13]

Part 31:  How the Google-EC Competition Deal Harms Europe [2-10-14]

Part 32: Open Letter to European Commissioners to Reject EC-Google Settlement [2-16-14]

Part 33: Google’s Extensive Cover-up [2-25-14]

Part 34: An Open Letter on Google’s Opposition to Distracted Driving Legislation [2-27-14]

Part 35: Google’s Widespread Wiretapping  [3-20-14]

Part 36: The Growing EC-Google Competition Settlement Scandal – an Open Letter [3-31-14]

Part 37: Google’s Glass House [4-14-14]

Part 38: Google’s Titan Spy-Drones Mimic Military Spy Planes [4-17-14]

Part 39: Google’s Anti-Competitive Rap Sheet Warrants Prosecution not Leniency [4-30-14]

Part 40: Google Apps for Education Dangers [5-17-14]

Part 41: Google AdSense Lawsuit Spotlights the Corruption of Unaccountability [5-23-14]

Part 42: Six Ways the FTC is AWOL on Google [7-16-14]

Part 43: Fact-checking Google’s Public EC Competition Defense [9-21-14]

Part 44: Top 10 Reasons Why Google is Causing EU More Problems than Microsoft Did [10-1-14]

Part 45:  Google Profiting from Hacked Celebrity Women Photos is “How Google Works” [10-6-14]

Part 46:  Fact-checking Google Schmidt’s “Ich bin ein Big-fibber” Berlin Speech [10-14-14]

Part 47:  Google’s Dominance Isn’t Peaking Its Proliferating! [11-4-14]

Part 48: A European Revolution against Google’s Virtual Colonialization? [11-24-14]

Part 49: Google’s Serial Bad Acts Harm American Interests in Europe [11-28-14]