September 13, 2007 6:45 PM PDT

Google proposes global privacy standard

While Google is leading a charge to create a global privacy standard for how companies protect consumer data, the search giant is recommending that remedies focus on whether a person was actually harmed by having the information exposed.

Google's proposal is scheduled to be presented by Peter Fleischer, Google's global privacy counsel, in a speech Friday in Strasbourg, France, at Unesco's meeting on ethics and human rights. He briefed reporters on Thursday.

The proposal follows the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Privacy Framework, which has been endorsed by many of the APEC nations, including Australia and Hong Kong, but not all. China, for instance, does not endorse it, Fleischer said.

"Google believes we need to work together to create minimum global standards, partly by law and partly by self-regulation," Fleischer said in a telephone conference call. "We need a collaboration between government and the private sector."

The APEC framework "promotes a flexible approach to information privacy protection" and is a "practical policy approach to enable accountability in the flow of data while preventing impediments to trade," according to the group's fact sheet. The nine principles of the framework are: preventing harm; integrity of personal information; notice; security safeguards; collection limitations; access and correction; uses of personal information; accountability; and choice.

Under a "preventing harm" principle in the framework, "any remedial measures should be proportionate to the likelihood and severity of the harm," the documents state.

"Privacy standards should focus on actual harms to consumer privacy," Fleischer said. "Other countries have an ideological bent...APEC has a pragmatic focus on privacy harms...not abstractions."

Fleischer has been shopping the idea around, meeting with the Spanish Data Protection Authority a few days ago ("He welcomed it warmly") and the French counterpart, which endorsed it.

Deflecting DoubleClick criticism?
However, a privacy advocate dismissed the move as a desperate attempt by Google to appear to be sensitive to privacy issues amid government scrutiny of its proposed $3.1 billion acquisition of online-ad firm DoubleClick.

Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, called the APEC Privacy Framework "backward looking" and said it "is the weakest international framework for privacy protection, far below what the Europeans require or what is allowed for trans-Atlantic transfers between Europe and the U.S.," particularly because it focuses on the need to show harm to the consumer. The guidelines were developed before there was data collected on the cost to consumers of identity theft and security breaches, he said.

"Google is under enormous pressure from many countries around the world who are fed up with their arrogance and their unwillingness to make meaningful changes to their business practices," Rotenberg said. "They're also trying desperately to push the acquisition of DoubleClick through the Federal Trade Commission. And they've met enormous resistance."

Fleischer denied that the proposed DoubleClick merger had anything to do with Google's actions.

"(This is) a sustained multipronged effort by Google to improve privacy practices...across the Internet," he said in his briefing. "People expect us to show some leadership. We would do this, regardless of whether DoubleClick were part of the equation."

Google will take its message to the public through a virtual debate it plans to open on YouTube soon, and it will participate in meetings in Montreal on September 24 with global privacy commissioners and in Washington, D.C. in October, Fleischer said.

Also, Google Chief Executive Eric Schmidt "will add his voice to this debate" in the next few days, Fleischer said, declining to elaborate.

Google has been speaking with Microsoft and Yahoo about the matter, and representatives from those companies expressed interest in the effort, Fleischer said.

A Microsoft representative said Google has not discussed its specific proposal with Microsoft but that Microsoft has been working with APEC countries on the privacy framework for a few years.

A Yahoo representative provided this statement when asked for comment: "Yahoo is dedicated to protecting the privacy of our users. It is a cornerstone of the trusted relationship that we have built with consumers. We are involved in a number of discussions, internally, and with others in the industry about the best methods for protecting consumer privacy. Those important conversations will continue in the months ahead."

Fleischer said he was invited to address Unesco at its meeting, which is focused on ethics in the information society, by the French Data Protection Authority. "We were looking for the right forum to launch this (effort) publicly," he said.

See more CNET content tagged:
DoubleClick Inc., information privacy, Marc Rotenberg, framework, harm

8 comments

Join the conversation!
Add your comment
WTF?
This is like MS proposing ethics standards.

This whole thing is a joke, Google is anti-privacy, and their dangerous notion of having to show harm done is the exact opposite of privacy.

What a joke. This is the fox in the henhouse.
Posted by The_Decider (3097 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Next up: M$FT Proposes Global Non-Monopoly Standard
But of course GOOG can do no wrong.
Posted by Anon-Y-mous (124 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Never in Europe
Luckily the EU will protect its citizens from this latest attempt to
allow Google run amok with other people's privacy.
Posted by Newspeak finder (79 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Showing Damages...Does that Mean Waiting for an ID Theft
I was particularly unimpressed about the emphasis on focusing on whether a person is actually harmed by a breach. This focus in the US has resulted in courts essentially determining that people can't recover anything unless they can show that a breach led to an identify theft (something I blogged about here: <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://ephemerallaw.blogspot.com/2007/08/7th-circuit-says-no-private-right-of.html" target="_newWindow">http://ephemerallaw.blogspot.com/2007/08/7th-circuit-says-no-private-right-of.html</a>). If Google was really serious about privacy, they would be looking at how courts have failed to protect privacy, and fixing the problems, not looking at how courts have failed to protect privacy and imitating them.
Posted by wmorriss (6 comments )
Reply Link Flag
covering ones bum?
Isn't funny how google propose this after the recent copyright scandal over addwords, peoples email and who actually holds the copyright to your/our words contained in an email...

It is no different to a goverment who pretend to care about us by enforcing health warnings on cigarettes, but without the taxation income from cigarettes goverments would find it very difficult to meet economic demands...

So, do google really care or are they just looking after themselves?

k
Posted by Kevin Walker (6 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Skeptical
Google has the largest information repository in the world. The information they manage ranges from the mundane to the most sensitive. I can't even imagine how much personal and private data flows across their systems. It should be obvious that Google has the most to gain and the most to lose.

I do like how they are gathering information from many walks though.

Does anyone remember that Google was recently given the lowest privacy grade possible by Privacy International? Either Google is trying to change their ways, or they are up to something. You can decide.

My Blog: <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.breachblog.com" target="_newWindow">http://www.breachblog.com</a>
Posted by trustedtoolkit (2 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Grandstanding
Google seems to have lots track of actually doing something useful and run totally off the rails in their attempt to grandstand for publicity. Good work being done on some of the power work, but this is a bit pathetic, as if the polemics around the analog TV frequencies.
Posted by Kimsh (813 comments )
Reply Link Flag
GOOGLE CHEATS INDIA??

I Have Checked in Google it is true. If you have the net connection please check it immediately..

JUST PUT ANY OF FOLLOWING URLS IN YOUR BROWSER AND CHECK HOW GOOGLE IS CHEATING INDIANS:

INDIAN VERSION(http://maps.google.co.in)

US VERSION (http://maps.google.com)

CHINESE VERSION (http://ditu.google.com/)

Guys
?

This is Serious!
After the Chinese demands for Arun achal Pradesh, Google now has started FOOLING Indians as well!
Google shows different maps for US, Indians and Chinese.

In the Indian Version, it shows Arunachal Pradesh as Integral Part of India ?

In the US Version, it shows Arunachal Pradesh as a Disputed region?
In the Chinese Version, it is not even part of India?

Where as in the Chinese version, it shows Arun achal Pradesh as an INTEGRAL PART of CHINA !
?

Our bloody polititions have no will. Let us take it up..
Please send this mail to EACH INDIAN YOU KNOW AND LETS SPREAD THE WORD.
I am attaching screen shots of the maps that i saw,
?

INDIAN VERSION(http://maps.google.co.in)

US VERSION (http://maps.google.com)

CHINESE VERSION (http://ditu.google.com/)

"Ask not What Your Country can do for you; ask what You can do for Your Country." - Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam

This message contains confidential information intended only for the person named above. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, distribute, copy, or print this e-mail. Thank you.

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.
If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email or any action taken in reliance on this e-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

--
- Debajyoti ~~~

http://www.google.com/profiles/debajyotihotobhaga.

--
Amit Datta,
2nd Year B-Tech Student,
Department of Computer Science and Engineering,
Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
Posted by neeradd (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
 

Join the conversation

Add your comment

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Click here to review our Terms of Use.

What's Hot

Discussions

Shared

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.