Slowly even the Google stock holders are beginning to realize that the “cool” company has quite a few things to catch up on regarding data protection and privacy, and that Google has some enormous deficits in its attitude toward censorship and human rights. At the upcoming stockholders meeting on the 8th of May these topics are on the agenda. The “Googlers” will most probably not deal with these questions for a long period of time and will push the topics aside as fast as possible – as the agenda proves. I recommend that those who still think Google is a “good company, which does no evil” should read the “2008 Annual Meeting of Stockholders Notice of the Annual Meeting and Proxy Statement”.

The New Yorker Office of the Comptroller of New York City and the monastery “St. Scholastica” have proposed, that Google should oppose censorship, support the right for freedom of opinion and press, and should no longer store user data.

Here are the claims in detail:
1) Data that can identify individual users should not be hosted in Internet restricting countries, where political speech can be treated as a crime by the legal system.
2) The company will not engage in pro-active censorship.
3) The company will use all legal means to resist demands for censorship. The company will only comply with such demands if required to do so through legally binding procedures.
4) Users will be clearly informed when the company has acceded to legally binding government requests to filter or otherwise censor content that the user is trying to access.
5) Users should be informed about the company’s data retention practices, and the ways in which their data is shared with third parties.
6) The company will document all cases where legally-binding censorship requests have been complied with, and that information will be publicly available.

And here is the answer/recommendation by the Google Directors:
Recommendation: Our board of directors recommends a vote AGAINST the stockholder proposal.

In the next proposal (5) Harrington Investments makes a claim for a human rights committee.
Board Committee on Human Rights. There is established a Board Committee on Human Rights, which is created and authorized to review the implications of company policies, above and beyond matters of legal compliance, for the human rights of individuals in the US and worldwide…

The proposed Bylaw would establish a Board Committee on Human Rights which would review and make policy recommendations regarding human rights issues raised by the company’s activities and policies. We believe the proposed Board Committee on Human Rights could be an effective mechanism for addressing the human rights implications of the company’s activities and policies as they emerge anywhere in the world. In defining “human rights,” proponents suggest that the committee could use the US Bill of Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as nonbinding benchmark or reference documents.

This is the answer/recommendation of the Google directors to the shareholders:
Recommendation: Our board of directors recommends a vote AGAINST the stockholder proposal.

This is really a “cool” company. Isn’t its motto “Don’t be evil?” Much more pressure should be put upon this company – even from the EU. If it is possible to force Microsoft to pay fines, it must be possible to ask Google for concessions.

Google is brilliant in deceiving und disguising. This was clearly demonstrated by the “hot” 700 MHz auctions in the USA when Google did not make a winning bid. Yet what should look like defeat is actually a victory. Everyone was convinced that the company would bid an outrageously huge amount – but it was only willing to bid 4.71 billion Dollars, and thereby letting Verizon win with 4.74 billion. I think this move was a rigged bid, especially if you consider that CEO Eric Schmidt helped define the auction rules for the US regulatory authority Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

Google requested free access for devices and service providers, to which FCC-boss Kevin J. Martin gave in (I wonder why?). Eric Schmidt’s demands were part of the auction tender: The network must be open to every service provider and any number of devices and software may be used. According to AFP, Google gave the following first follow-up: “although Google did not place a winning bid, it was an important victory for the American consumer”. Even though Google did not receive the frequency-licenses, it is allowed to use the network and run its services over it.

Google’s acquisition of Doubleclick is not yet completely accepted. On the 11th of March 2008, the EU-Commission gave its approval to the deal, yet Google may still face unexpected problems. Doubleclick acquired the company Performics in 2004 – a so-called SEO – Search Engine Optimizer.

Performics sells tips and tricks on how to be placed in a prominent position on search engine results. An irreconcilable situation.
Even Danny Sullivan, the world’s greatest expert on search engines, believes this. He published an open letter to Google on his web portal, Searchengineland, to sell Performics. To be precise, this means that Google sells tips on how to be placed high up on the results of its own search engine. An unethical situation that should be of concern to everyone: this is almost as if an antivirus-software-company would create and circulate viruses and Trojans, that could be identified and eradicated only by its own software…

I wonder if the EU-commission was aware of Performics…