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

Privacy Group Urges FTC to Investigate Google Buzz

Add as a preferred source on Google

The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) has filed a formal complaint (PDF) with the Federal Trade Commission, urging the regulatory agency to open an investigation in Google Buzz. Google recently launched Buzz on February 9 as a social add-on to its widely-used Gmail email service and drew a firestorm of criticism from consumers and privacy advocates for failing to give users full control over what information was available to other Buzz users. Google has been scrambling to address these criticisms; now, EPIC alleges that Buzz not only violates Google’s own privacy policy, but also runs afoul of federal consumer protection laws and maybe even federal wiretapping laws.

google-buzz-gmail
Image used with permission by copyright holder

“This is a significant breach of consumers’ expectations of privacy,” said EPIC executive director Marc Rotenberg, in a statement. “Google should not be allowed to push users’ personal information into a social network they never requested.”

Recommended Videos

When Google launched Buzz, users looking at the services were automatically listed as “following” posts from people with whom they regularly exchanged email. Participating in Buzz also created a public profile for a user that offered a public list of a user’s contacts. Effectively, Buzz published a list of names that represented a users’ most common email contacts.

EPIC argues that leveraging previously-private email address book contacts to compile a social network violates users’ privacy expectations, Google’s own terms of service, and constitute unfair and deceptive trade practices. According to EPIC’s complaint, the organization wants Google to make Buzz a fully opt-in-only service, and fully disclose that profiles and connections would be accessible to everyone. EPIC also argues a user’s personal address book—data which users have not consented to have published—should not be used as the basis for forming connections on Google Buzz.

Google has been drawing increasing criticism for retaining sensitive data about its users and overly sharing that data with the broader world. Although some users of the broader social Internet are clearly fine with that—Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg has declared online privacy is not a social norm—there are also clearly instances where automatic collection and sharing of information from things like address books can cause material harm. As one anonymous blogger “Harriet Jacobs” wrote in response to Google Buzz: “I use my private Gmail account to email my boyfriend and my mother. There’s a BIG drop-off between them and my other ‘most frequent’ contacts. You know who my third most frequent contact is? My abusive ex-husband.”

Geoff Duncan
Former Contributor
Geoff Duncan writes, programs, edits, plays music, and delights in making software misbehave. He's probably the only member…
Topics
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