Google

A more apt name for Jerry Brito’s new website, PiracyData.org, would be BlameTheVictims.org.

In a tweet trumpeting the purpose of PiracyData.org, Mr. Brito exclaimed: “Here’s why Hollywood should blame itself for its piracy problems – [link] Thx to @binarybits[Wash-post blogger] for this write up!”

If you are interested in understanding serious emerging problems with algorithmic markets, please don’t miss my Daily Caller op-ed “Bitcoin’s Quixotic Search for Legality” – here.

• It is Part 10 of my Algorithmic Markets research series.

Algorithmic Markets Research Series

Part 1: Who's Looking Out for Investors? [6-14-01]

Given that Google’s Privacy Policy Counsel, David Lieber, is the only corporate representative speaking at Cato’s impressive conference tomorrow in D.C. on: NSA Surveillance: What We Know and What to Do about It, let me suggest some questions to ask Mr. Lieber about Google’s views on surveillance and spying in general. 

Google’s recent “Report: How Google Fights Piracy,” begs cross-examination, for the same reason courts and Congress employ the tool of cross examination and the process of adversarial hearings to get to the real truth. 

We all are familiar with the legal oath: “Do you solemnly swear that you will tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God?”

Please see my latest Daily Caller Op-ed – “Implications of EU Ruling Google Abused its Search Dominance” -- here.

Google Unaccountability Series

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

Last week a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel unanimously ruled that Google’s recording of peoples’ home WiFi signals without their knowledge or permission is indeed wiretapping.

For those interested in the implications of this ruling, please see a five minute video -- here -- where I explain what Google did; why the Ninth Circuit ruling is so significant and ominous for Google; why Google’s public story of how this happened is preposterous; and why it is now class action lawsuit catnip.

Thanks and kudos to Mike Wendy of Media Freedom for his video interview.

Google's Disrespect for Privacy Series

Part 1: Why Google is the Biggest Threat to Americans' Privacy; House Testimony [7-18-08]

Economic rationality, competition, and broadband pricing freedom are the big winners, and common carrier-like net neutrality was the big loser, if the Appeals Court panel decides Verizon v. FCC as expected.

Monday’s intense tag-team grilling of the FCC’s lawyer by Judges Tatel and Silberman left most observers thinking the Court will decide it is illegal for the FCC to impose common-carrier-like regulation on broadband providers -- regardless of what else they decide.  

Google can expect a big rest-of-world trust problem when it rolls out Google Glass overseas, because of: foreign fallout from Edward Snowden’s illegal disclosures of NSA surveillance activities; Google’s reputation for aggressive and pervasive spying on people’s privacy; and Google’s cavalier legal stance that people have “no legitimate expectation of privacy.”

Anyone interested in Google Glass should not miss CNET Molly Wood's "Google Glass Rant."

In a short and very entertaining ~2 min video, she explains, and acts out, why she believes: "Google Glass is a new frontier in human rudeness, inattention, and danger." And she concludes that "the world is not ready for Google Glass."

Simply, she understands that the real problems with Google Glass are not so much problems for the actual users of Google Glass, but for other people who happen to find themselves in proximity of glass users.  

Yet again, Google has violated the first rule of holes; when in a hole, stop digging.

Google is unwisely keeping the story alive that Oracle CEO Larry Ellison said this to Charlie Rose on air: [Google] “took our stuff and … that was wrong. This really bothers me. I don’t see how [Larry Page] thinks you can just copy someone else’s stuff.” 

In a Google+ post to his followers, Google Chairman Eric Schmidt responded: “We typically try to avoid getting dragged into public battles with other companies. But I’ve gotten a lot of questions about Larry Ellison’s claims that Google “took [Oracle’s] stuff”.  It’s simply untrue -- and that’s not just my opinion, but the judgment of a U.S. District Court.” 

Does Google really want to engage in a broader public conversation about the truth and facts of Google’s serial disrespect for the property of others?