Google apparently is ending an egregious privacy breach involving people who buy apps from its Google Play store using Google Wallet to pay. Consumer Watchdog filed a complaint to the Federal Trade Commission with a copy to California Attorney General Kamala Harris about what Google was doing. The complaint  alleged that the Internet giant was violating its privacy policies and its “Buzz” consent agreement with the FTC.

Rep. Hank Johnson, D-GA, also questioned Google about what it was doing.  Google was sending to apps developers the name, email address and address of people who bought apps on Google play.  It tried to claim that the the information was necessary for the transaction, but that’s clearly not the case when talking about downloading an app from its app store. Neither Apple nor Microsoft provide such personal information about people who buy apps from their stores. Google’s response to Rep. Johnson, confirmed what Google was doing and actually showed it was unnecessary.  Consumer Watchdog sent a second letter to the FTC with a copy to California Attorney General Harris when Google answered Rep. Johnson’s letter.

On Tuesday WebProNews and DroidLife reported Google was addressing the concerns on a new Wallet Merchant Center it is rolling out and no longer sending the personal information about apps buyers.

I’m glad the change is coming, but I’ve got questions.

What role did the Federal Trade Commission or the California Attorney General’s office play in this change?  Why did Google only act when formal complaints were filed? Will there be fines?

Google has become a serial privacy violator.  You’ll remember that new sooner was the ink dry on the “Buzz” consent agreement than it was caught hacking around the privacy settings on the Safari browser used on iPhones, iPads and other Apple devices.  It ultimately cost Google a fine of $22.5 million, which is pocket change to a company that has annual revenue of around $50 billion. It’s like giving a $25 parking ticket to a person who makes $50,000 a year.

Google is simply figuring that fines are a cost — and a minor one at that — of doing business.  In case you missed it, on Monday Germany hit Google with a $189,225 for the Wi-Spy incident where its Street View Cars sucked up emails, URLs, passwords, account numbers as they snapped photos around the world.

In describing the fine The New York Times‘ Claire Cain Miller wrote:

Regulators in Germany, one of the most privacy-sensitive countries in the world, unleashed their wrath on Google on Monday for scooping up sensitive personal information in the Street View mapping project, and imposed the largest fine ever assessed by European regulators over a privacy violation.

The penalty? $189,225.

Put another way, that’s how much Google made every two minutes last year, or roughly 0.002 percent of its $10.7 billion in net profit.
It is the latest example of regulators’ meager arsenal of fines and punishments for corporations in the wrong. Academics, activists and even regulators themselves say fines that are pocket change for companies do little to deter them from misbehaving again, and are merely baked into the cost of doing business.

The fact Google is changing Google Wallet’s practices makes it clear Google violated the Buzz Agreement.   Google claims that it is taking privacy seriously now that it is operating for 20 years under the Buzz Agreement. It isn’t and the regulators aren’t holding Google’s feet to the fire.

The company’s executives need to be held to account in a meaningful way. I’ve always argued the way to get corporate executives’ attention is to hit them with jail time when they flout the law.  It’s not going to happen here, but a meaningful fine for the second Buzz violation sure would be nice.

_________________________________________________________________

Posted by John M. Simpson, Director of Consumer Watchdog’s Privacy Project. Follow Consumer Watchdog online on Facebook and on Twitter.

Reports were circulating in the tech press Friday that serial privacy violator Google is about to cut a deal with state attorneys general to close their investigation of the Wi-Spy scandal.

Remember what happened?  Google sent specially equipped cars to travel the highways and byways of the world snapping photos of everything they passed.  What Google did not say was that were also sniffing out Wi-Fi networks and sucking up private data on those networks.

They got passwords, account numbers and email messages, including in France a couple trying to arrange an extramarital affair.

When first confronted, Google executives denied sucking up the data.  Then they said it was all a mistake.  Then they said it was the work of a rouge engineer. Consumer Watchdog was among those to call on the Federal Trade Commission to investigate. The FTC did, but dropped the probe after Google essentially said, we’ll be nice.

The Federal Communication Commission opened a probe ultimately fining Google $25,000 for hindering its investigation.  The FCC also found that the Wi-Fi snooping had been deliberate and that senior managers had been aware of it.  The FCC said it could not determine if the law had been broken because the engineer who designed the Wi-Fi snooping exercised is Fifth Amendment rights and declined to testify.

Google tried to spin the FCC probe by saying the commission found they had not broken the law. That’s not what happened; the FCC said they could not determine if the law had broken. A big difference.

Meanwhile, under the leadership of then Connecticut Attorney Richard Blumenthal, more than 30 state attorneys general launched their investigation of the incident, which is really the largest case of wire tapping in history.

It’s that state attorneys general probe that is reportedly about to be settled for $7 million.  That may sound like a lot, but it’s not even pocket change to the Internet giant, which made $10.7 billion profit on revenues of $50.2 billion in 2012. Divide the fine among the states and it comes out to about $230,000 for each.

I asked Susan Kinsman, spokesperson for Connecticut Attorney General George Jepsen, now heading the investigation, about prospects for a deal.  She said, “I spoke to our attorneys for a status report. As we’ve stated before, the Google investigation is active and ongoing. I can’t comment about any prospect for a settlement.”

Nonetheless, there are enough sourced reports out there, focusing on the $7 million deal that it sounds like it’s accurate.  It was probably leaked on Friday by Google itself. That’s the way they usually play the PR game. By the time the settlement is officially announced it will be old news.

What’s important, by the way, is not the measly $7 million fine.  It’s understanding what’s really happening. Once again it looks like Google, the serial privacy violator, is buying it’s way out of a jam with what for the Internet giant is pocket change.

We’ll need to see what other provisions the settlement contains.  Will the state attorneys general give Google the same sort of pass that the FTC did when it allowed Google to explicitly deny it broke the law in the Safari hacking scandal and charged Google $22.5 million? What will happen to the data Google sucked up? Will there being any meaningful injunctive relief?  Given Google’s record of repeated privacy violations and of bamboozling regulators, I’m not optimistic that much of anything significant will emerge.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Posted by John M. Simpson. John is a leading voice on technological privacy and stem cell research issues. His investigations this year of Google’s online privacy practices and book publishing agreements triggered intense media scrutiny and federal interest in the online giant’s business practices. His critique of patents on human embryonic stem cells has been key to expanding the ability of American scientists to conduct stem cell research. He has ensured that California’s taxpayer-funded stem cell research will lead to broadly accessible and affordable medicine and not just government-subsidized profiteering. Prior to joining Consumer Watchdog in 2005, he was executive editor of Tribune Media Services International, a syndication company. Before that, he was deputy editor of USA Today and editor of its international edition. Simpson taught journalism a Dublin City University in Ireland, and consulted for The Irish Times and The Gleaner in Jamaica. He served as president of the World Editors Forum. He holds a B.A. in philosophy from Harpur College of SUNY Binghamton and was a Gannett Fellow at the Center for Asian and Pacific Studies at the University of Hawaii. He has an M.A. in Communication Management from USC’s Annenberg School for Communication.

Karl Rove, Hyundai and Elizabeth Warren Can Go In “The Dog House” With Consumer Watchdog’s New Free App That Lets iPhone Users Create Meme-Like Images

Leading Consumer Group Offers Alerts, News & Expression In 5-Star Rated App

Consumer Watchdog’s new five-star rated app gives iPhone and iPad users a way to complain, stay informed and be engaged on the top consumer issues of the day. A popular feature, the “Consumer Watchdog Dog House,” allows consumers to take a photo with their phone and satirize or applaud a politician, company or product and share it with their networks.

“Consumer Watchdog Mobile is a great new way to express your thoughts on the election. Think Super PACs poisoned the election? Now you can take a picture with your phone and put them in an actual Dog House. Win a ballot initiative fight for marriage equality? Announce it to everyone you know with the Dog House Daily Times,” said Carmen Balber, Washington DC Director for Consumer Watchdog.

The free Consumer Watchdog Mobile application can be downloaded from the Apple App Store or by clicking this link

Consumer Watchdog Mobile features:

1) Live updates of Blogs, News, Videos and Podcasts – Stay up-to-date on breaking consumer protection news and ongoing Consumer Watchdog campaigns.

2) Real-time Consumer Complaints – Report problems and complaints as they occur, and view others that match your own.

3) Mobile Action Center – With weekly Consumer Watchdog actions, contact a member of Congress or email a corporate CEO on the go.

4) Consumer Watchdog Dog House – Satirize a politician, company or faulty product and share it on social media. Nine meme-like templates let you literally put a politician in the Dog House, set corporate executives’ “pants on fire” or point out a lobbyist who’s swimming in cash.  

The fun never stops with infographics… this one is particularly interesting for those of us obsessed with politics – whether it’s local, state or national, voters are using the Internet to learn about candidates and issues. We’re beginning to see a solid link between voters clicking “Like” and filling out their ballots. Data release yesterday by local news aggregation site Topix makes a compelling case for new media as a medium for engaging, persuading and then – closing the deal.

This is definitely worth checking out:

http://www.readwriteweb.com/ar…

More fun with infographics – this one on how Broadband saves you money. Quite a bit of money.

http://internetinnovation.org/…

There’s been a lot of talk in the wake of Steve Jobs’ passing about the future of innovation and the status of tech ingenuity in a post-Jobs world. It got us to thinking about what are the drivers of invention and innovation. Clearly, when it comes to technology, a single person’s brilliance has proven strong enough to shape and reshape, our cultural, social and tech landscape.

But what about for the other 99.9999% of us, the not-geniuses – what will we rely on to shape and reshape our own world and future – to change careers, start a business or connect with like-minded people? And what about those of us living in rural areas?

We found the beginnings of an answer in a recent post by Rick Boucher of the Internet Innovation Alliance, which makes the simple but profound point that: “This generation’s light bulb is broadband.” In short, with broadband access, all of us have the power to invent and innovate. Boucher uses telemedicine to make his case that

“high-speed Internet connectivity overcomes distance and enables transformative changes in the economy and quality of life for rural areas.”

Boucher puts it this way:

“Broadband breaks down barriers to modern day advancement. In terms of commerce, it enables nearly any business to be conducted from any wired location. Physical urban proximity to customers and suppliers, which once was the norm for businesses, is now unnecessary due to the virtual proximity created by a high-speed Internet connection–the same communications needs can be met and business operations completed whether located across a street or across an ocean.”

He goes on to site a new report conducted by the University of Texas Medical Branch Center that

“explores the potentially life-changing (and life-saving) benefits of widespread broadband deployment. The report, “Benefits of Telemedicine in Remote Communities and Use of Mobile and Wireless Platforms in Healthcare,” http://www.internetinnovation…. explores the role of telecommunications technologies in raising the bar for the quality of healthcare that Americans can access, particularly those in remote communities.”

This report is well worth checking out – it goes in-depth to examine

“how broadband connectivity has enabled progress in healthcare innovation and impacted real-world patients. Mobile platforms like modern smartphones, for example, can be connected wirelessly to physiologic monitors worn on a patient’s body or embedded into a patient’s garment. These new telehealth-related possibilities have translated into observable outcomes such as improved access to specialists, increased patient satisfaction, improved clinical outcomes, less crowded emergency rooms and cost savings.”

The report and Boucher’s blog are both good reads, and will make you reflect on the fact that “being away from the big city doesn’t have to mean being behind the big city” because broadband is the innovation that will fuel a new generation of innovation and advances.

Special interests are trying to distract attention from the facts.

For eight years, LightSquared has navigated the regulatory process to win approvals to build America’s first privately funded coast-to-coast wireless broadband service. LightSquared’s plan to invest billions of dollars to use its frequencies for an integrated ground-space network has been supported by both Republican and Democratic regulators –Michael Powell and Kevin Martin, FCC Chairmen appointed by President Bush,and Julius Genachowski, the FCC Chairman appointed by President Obama. In fact, the regulatory approvals that paved our way came in the mid-2000’s, during the Bush administration under Powell and Martin.

Regulators from both parties understand LightSquared’s approach will create more competition in the marketplace, put downward pressure on the prices paid by consumers, create good paying jobs in the tech sector, and give Americans access to the most modern cellular technology. LightSquared’s plan has drawn bipartisan support because it’s right for the country.

Any suggestion that LightSquared has run roughshod over the regulatory process is contradicted by the reality of eight long years spent gaining approvals. Just this week, there has been another request from the government for an additional round of testing of LightSquared’s network.

We understand that some in the telecom sector fear the challenges for their business model that LightSquared presents. We understand the opposition of some in the GPS industry; many of their devices “squat” on someone else’s spectrum and while technological fixes are readily available, some companies are loath to make the necessary engineering changes and would instead prefer to get access to someone else’s spectrum for free.

It’s also ludicrous to suggest LightSquared’s success depends on political connections. This is a private company that has never taken one dollar in taxpayer money. About $10,600 sits in the LightSquared PAC. The founder of LightSquared has given to candidates in both political parties in the last eight years, with two thirds of his contributions going to Republicans because of the founder’s free market philosophy. It’s difficult to charge that LightSquared has undue political influence when it was denied the opportunity to testify at the recent hearing of the House Armed Service Committee’s Strategic Forces Subcommittee – or even be allowed a one-on-one meeting with the chariman of that committee prior to the hearing, as the GPS industry was given.

This entrepreneurial company is poised to create as many as 15,000 jobs as it spends $8 billion to help provide American consumers with cheaper, better cell service. It’s time Washington politicians stop using LightSquared as a piñata. Smart engineers, not political rhetoric, should decide LightSquared’s fate.

If LightSquared is blocked from entering the wireless market, consumers will lose out on the benefits of a new source of more competition, better service and lower prices.

This editorial in The Detroit News by Orjiakor N. Isiogu, chairman of the Michigan Public Service Commission, very nearly perfectly sums up our argument.

Like HDTV before it, 4G-LTE wireless holds incredible promise for consumers and device manufacturers alike. But today there is insufficient wireless capacity to support millions of 4G-LTE devices, and demand is rising ever faster. According to Cisco Systems, mobile traffic is expected to increase 26-fold by 2015. By 2015 the majority of Internet traffic will be via mobile devices – a reality unthinkable just two years ago.

That’s why LightSquared’s venture is significant. It would substantially increase America’s broadband wireless capacity while providing next-generation high-speed wireless data and voice to areas previously underserved. In addition, the company plans to market its nationwide network on a wholesale model, allowing any number of new competitors to enter the market. Many observers have hailed this proposal as a key part of President Obama’s plan to increase high-speed Internet adoption nationwide, while also increasing competition in a consolidating wireless industry, all at zero cost to taxpayers, thanks to a planned $25 billion investment by the company.

More competitors in the market will mean lower prices and better service for consumers, along with expanded wireless broadband options. Another key benefit will be the economic benefit associated with building out a national network, including the creation of an estimated 15,000 jobs per year. Public safety could be enhanced by this network as well.

Simply put, whether you’re somewhere in urban Michigan or rural California, an expanded wireless network means more competition, lower prices, and better service. And we’re doing it all at zero cost to taxpayers.

For real – it is. And the truth is, that while all of this debate about the AT&T/T-Mobile merger is important, worthwhile and necessary, it’s also something of a red herring. Because at the end of the day the problem that the merger was initiated in part to address, the problem that will ultimately prevent new competition, stifle innovation and shut down the incredible potential to create jobs and grow the economy through broadband investment remains.

And that problem is SPECTRUM.

And if there’s something we know a little bit about, it’s the need for more spectrum.

Check out this very excellent article written by Jeff Kagen at E-Commerce Times, “Let’s Solve the Real Wireless Problem: Spectrum Shortage” http://www.technewsworld.com/s…