Skip to main content
  1. Home
  2. Computing
  3. Web
  4. Legacy Archives

Google Details Censorship and Takedown Requests

Add as a preferred source on Google

Google‘s recent decision to stop complying with Chinese censorship requirements and relocate its Google.cn search service to Hong Kong has raised a host of questions about how Google deals with government requests (and demands) that content be removed from Google and its services like YouTube, as well as how often Google is required to hand over information about its users to government and law enforcement in other countries. Although Google has previously outlined its stance on removing content and handing over data about its users, but now the company is offering a little more data, including an interactive map of government requests directed to Google and YouTube between July and December 2009. And at the top of the lists for requests for content-take downs and user information? Not China, not Myanmar, not Khazakstan or another repressive regime. Instead, it’s Brazil.

Image used with permission by copyright holder

Part of the reason that Brazil tops the list is that the data offered by Google is necessarily incomplete. For instance, it only covers requests in criminal matters, no information at all is listed for China or Russia, and no African countries are represented at all. Similarly, the numbers can be skewed by the nature of the requests: sometimes a single request wants Google to remove multiple pieces of content, or seeks information about more than one Google account; similarly, multiple request may demand the removal of the same piece of content. Google also isn’t saying much about whether it actually complied with a request or challenged it, although the company is offering percentages about its compliance with requests to remove content, along with some breakdown of where that content lived—for instance, YouTube, Blogger, or Google’s social networking service Orkut.

Recommended Videos

“Google products—from search and Blogger to YouTube and Google Docs—have been blocked in 25 of the 100 countries where we offer our services,” Google’s VP of global communications and public affairs Rachel Whetstone wrote in the company blog. “Where possible, we are transparent with our users about what content we have been required to block or remove so they understand that they may not be getting the full picture.”

In terms of data removal request, the top countries were Brazil, Germany, India, the United States, and South Korea; the top five countries requesting user data from Google were Brazil, the United States, the United Kingdom, India, and France.

Google admits it’s new to presenting this sort of information, and plans to refine the types of information about take-down requests and demands for user information.

Whetstone re-iterated Google’s stance towards open exchange of information remains unchanged: “We have a bias in favor of people’s right to free expression. We are driven by a belief that more information means more choice, more freedom and ultimately more power for the individual.”

Geoff Duncan
Former Contributor
Geoff Duncan writes, programs, edits, plays music, and delights in making software misbehave. He's probably the only member…
AI is finding Apple security flaws faster than Apple can sort through them
Apple has limited how many bug reports researchers can keep open as AI tools produce both genuine Mac vulnerabilities and a flood of questionable submissions
Lighting, Architecture, Building

Apple has capped the number of security reports researchers can keep open at once after AI bug hunting put its review process under pressure, according to the Financial Times.

Some submissions describe hallucinated or purely theoretical risks. Others uncover vulnerabilities serious enough to require patches. Bynario told the FT that it found more than 50 possible macOS flaws in three weeks, including a privilege-escalation chain that could give an attacker full control of a Mac.

Read more
Anthropic is paying $1.5 billion over pirated books, but it can still legally cut up purchased ones
The settlement addressed unauthorized ebook downloads, not the destructive scanning of lawfully bought physical copies, a distinction now alarming booksellers
Book, Publication, Indoors

A federal judge has approved Anthropic’s $1.5 billion settlement over nearly half a million pirated books. The same litigation also protected a more physical method of feeding its AI systems. Anthropic bought print books, removed their bindings, scanned every page and destroyed the originals.

The legal divide came down to acquisition. The settlement covers books downloaded from LibGen and PiLiMi, while the court treated Anthropic’s one-for-one conversion of purchased books into private digital files as fair use. Training AI models on lawfully acquired material was also considered transformative.

Read more
Google Earth’s AI misadventure lasted only a day. It was a tale of dangerous ignorance.
Nuclear reactors, tanks, and historical destruction on a life-like satellite map? Yeah, that's bad.
Nano Banana AI image generator representation.

Technology behemoths are clearly not reading the room, or they are just moving faster than they should when it comes to AI deployment. Google has already stuffed its Gemini AI in every corner of its software stack, from Android to daily productivity tools like Gmail that are used by hundreds of millions of users every day. AI is everywhere. Not all of it is bad, mind you. But in a few places, it just feels forced.

In its latest AI-fication experiment, the company targeted Google Earth. The idea was to let the audience use its Nano Banana 2 AI image generator and make images that can be placed on the map view. On paper, it's a cool idea. What would the Colosseum of Rome look like in your urban neighborhood? Yeah, fun stuff like that.

Read more