Google Provides Details Of Anonymous Blogger In Israel (Updated)
Duncan Riley
56 comments »
Google has provided the IP address of an anonymous blogger to an Israeli court as part of a defamation case, according to the Globes Online.
The defamation case centers on allegations against three members of the Shaarei Tikva council posted on Blogger, including posts that suggested the council members took bribes, pretended to be disabled to gain tax advantages, and that the councilmen have links to organized crime. The councilmen asked the court to order Google to hand over the IP address details of the anonymous blogger but the court did not order Google to do so. Instead Google entered into an arrangement where by they would contact the blogger and give him or her 3 days to respond anonymously to the allegations. There was no response from the blogger so Google handed over the IP address to the court and plantiffs despite there being no legal requirement for them to do so. (Update: See below).
According to Globes Online, Google had initially said that “disclosing the blogger’s identity violated rulings on the balance between freedom of expression and a person’s right to his reputation,” so what changed? This is the same company that refused to comply with US Government requests for information in 2005, a company that prides itself on privacy and its “Do No Evil” mantra. Perhaps the moral of the story: trust no one on privacy, even Google.
Update: We received email from Google regarding this story:
We wanted to let you know some facts about this case as we are concerned that the story on TechCrunch (like the one on Globes) is not accurate.
1. Google’s approach to providing users’ personal data is clear – we only provide information to third parties (such as law enforcement agencies) when they have been through the proper legal process. This ensures that we are able both to protect the privacy of our users and act responsibly where people may have used Google’s products to break the law.
2. In terms of this case:
· Members of the Israeli Shaarei Tikva Council asked for an injunction against Google - requiring us to provide the IP address of a blogger who had allegedly defamed them;
· Google opposed the injunction. Amongst other things, we wanted to give the blogger a chance to explain in court why his or her IP address should not be disclosed to members of the council;
· On 18 November the court agreed that the blogger should be sent a notice (via the blog) inviting him/her to appear at a hearing on 25 November 2007;
· The blogger failed to appear at this hearing – in his/her absence, and having considered all the various arguments, the court ordered that the IP address (which it was holding) be provided to the members of the council.3. Google approach to this case has been entirely consistent with the way it handles all third party requests for user data.
4. In terms of Blogger, we have clear terms and conditions, which users agree to when they sign up for the service. These make clear that:
· Certain types of content is against our rules;
· Violation of our terms of service may lead not only to the termination of the users’ account but also “state and federal penalties and other legal consequences”; and
· Google may investigate any violations to “comply with any applicable law, regulation, legal process or governmental request”.In your comment to M Freitas you say “I’d note that Google voluntarily handed these details over, if the court had ordered them to do so, so be it but if they are serious about privacy they would have pushed it to that level, not just caved in at the first opportunity”. As you can see from the details above Google did oppose the injunction in court, we did not just cave in at the first opportunity and we did argue that the blogger in question should have the chance to make their case. But having considered all sides of the argument the judge ordered that the IP address be handed over.
Privacy 2.over
Anonymous users have no place on the web. That will soon come to an end.
All’s fair in love and war and internet
Kind of a poor decision on Google’s part, IMO, especially on the rumored precipice of a GDrive launch. How willing will you be to store your business files with Google knowing that they’ve set the precedence that they are willing to turn over information, even without a court order…
Google has done this in India as well http://www.cnet.com/8301-13739_1-9811569-46.html
2. Max
what’s wrong with being anonymous?
But how big is Google in Israel? Perhaps as small as the New Zealand operation, and a low level employee too eager to “help” authorities and with a completely different set of morals?
New Zealand and Australian privacy laws are much more restrict than the ones in the U.S. for example - but what are these in Israel? Is the employee accountable?
Now that this is known, will Google go back and say “we always train our employees in our believes, but this was an error of judgement issued by a local employee, in relation to the lack (or relaxed) privacy laws in that specific country?”
It is important to note that while my privacy is protected in New Zealand, it may not be while abroad.
M Freitas
I take you point, but I’d note that Google voluntarily handed these details over; if the court had ordered them to do so, so be it, but if they are serious about privacy they would have pushed it to that level, not just caved in at the first opportunity.
Don’t know about Israel but in the U.S. the constitution protects the right to free speech and not the right to anonymity. Google did not turn over data such as emails or documents - they effectively just “fingered” an anonymous coward. How this will play in hearts and minds of Google users is certainly another matter and fair game for discussion.
this just proves
don’t trust Google with your data.
and Google is getting into health care too with medical records. obviously actions like this show that Google is not to be trusted with your data.
remember do no evil yeah right.
for once duncan breaks some interesting news. Congrats, Duncan!
Have you reached out to Google to see if they’ll comment? The whole thing seems kind of odd.
I would love to see how this plays out in the media. Yahoo was raked over the coals over the Chinese journalist. However, I suspect the ridiculous double standard Google enjoys will again save the company from bad press.
This is a bit interesting. I don’t like anonymous posting but why volunteer the information if not asked to. Interesting.
google will do what is financially expedient…
google is the microsoft of the web.
“do no evil” is crap
I’m anxiously awaiting the Google fanboys to give them a pass on this. Jerry Yang gets his crap pushed in by Congress for dealing with China, but of course, our sweet heroes Google can do wrong! They have Segways and they hire the best college grads and ooh, solar panels too…
So from now on if you want to be a whistleblower AVOID Google’s services.
That is, if you want any semblance of privacy.
Anonymity on the Internet is a myth. Standing up to your beliefs would be, then, the better thing to do. As wrong as they may be.
Yawn. ORLY!
Now that we talk about Silicon Valley love child Google and US-adopted Israel: only 17 comments — inspite of worse behavior. Yahoo and China got 165 comments. Talk about warped reality of TC readers.
Duncan: stay on the topic, you’re doing well.
Knowing some people in the Israeli underworld, I’d say the blogger’s life is now in definite peril.
Shame on Google.
yea bad day for google, That occupied territory is full of terrorists masquerading as officials. Shame on google and someone should contact the whistle blower blogger and see that they have a way to blog about all the torture that they incur as a result. (maybe Google would help publicize it)….
Wow, three days to answer. Ridiculous.
Google = Yahoo = Amazon = eBay
You don’t really want confidential data with any of them.
Voluntarily? It may not be that simple. An arrangement reached under the auspices of the court is effectively a court order.
The arrangement was for Google to try to contact the blogger first with an offer to file a counterclaim as “John Doe”. It’s possible that it was clear to anyone present that the alternative was for the judge to just order Google to immediately reveal the information. If that is indeed the case then Google was actually trying to protect the blogger. The court protocols may or may not support this theory. It is also possible that the Google caved in just a little too quickly and failed to negotiate better term on behalf of the anonymous blogger (three days?!)
If would have been better if after failing to contact the individual the court had issued an official order rather than just rely on the previous arrangement. Appearances matter.
google sucks!
Sorry to dissapoint but you got it all wrong..
I read your post and being Hebrew speaking decided to check the info on some Israeli websites.This is what I found:
(The source is Israel’s biggest newpaper on Israel’s biggest news site)
-For the first time in Israel a court ordered Google to hand over a user’s ip address for defamation against candidates for the regional government.
-Citing freedom of speach, google at first refused to hand over the ip.
-The blogger is being sued for 300,000 NIS (~$80,000)
-The judge argued that it is important to find a balance between the right to free speach, and the right to a good name (literal translation, I’m not familiar with the American judicial term).
For those who care about search privacy on Google ( providing details on your search history is probably the next step). I’m developping a firefox add-on which generates artificial searches and clicks on Google (and yahoo) to protect your privacy.
It’s not like TrackMeNot … I’m trying to make more realist searches.
More information : http://squigglesr.free.fr
#24 Yair is right. it was an israeli court decision. for hebrew readers, here is a link to the court decision.
http://info1.court.gov.il/Prod.....penElement
How can Google find the user of the IP address if it was an anonymous post? Ip may have been assigned dynamically or even if static the ISP should not/would not have shared that ip to name info with Google.
So unless its a full conspiracy (without the theory) pre-empted to not look like yahoo-china mess.
the only innocent looking explanation is google posted on the same site looking for the anonymous poster. and wait only 3 days? whats the likeliness of someone catching that ???
I see no wrong with what Google has done. People need to understand that their privacy is important until it clashes with other laws (such as “the good name” thing mentioned above).
Do NOT attempt to hide behind your computer (like hackers, child porn collectors, rapists, etc. - who we all agree should be locked up). The only real privacy you have is inside your head. Avoid doing wrong things, taking pictures of wrong things, creating files and content of illegal material, sharing illegal content (like music, videos, etc.) - and you’ll be fine. Break the law, and you’ll be found.
The only things I believe should be protected by privacy laws are those that resemble physcological/medical/law issues that are protected by client-attorney/doctor/physocologist laws.
For anything else - you have no privacy, get over it.
Google had earned so much respect int he past by protecting the privacy and freedom of speech of its users. But what Google has done is plain wrong.
People out there are disappointed.
Internet companies who want to remain favorites of the masses must maintain confidentiality of its users, unless the user has committed a serious crime.
Google’s action is deplorable. -ve rep to Google for this…
What if the information is true about those politicians’ behavior? Faking a handicap, it’s not something surprising, I see it everyday. I disagree with those who think the revealing this person’s IP (and ultimately identity) is OK. You can’t compare what this person did to criminal behavior.
Google turning over the IP address is the tech of a journalist naming sources.
Why would you post something with legal ramifications online? A the very least he should have used a boatload of proxies to at least make the chase interesting.
Duncan,
It seems poor standards to post such an accusation without checking with Google for their input first. Despite posting the update, that’s too little too late with a site with the visibility of TechCrunch.
There are ALWAYS two sides to an issue. In this case, it looks as if you used a second source, Globes Online, without checking with the primary source, Google.
Mark
“Instead Google entered into an arrangement it”
…either the blogger can caught off his sausage himself, or Google (the do no evil part) will give him a three-day headstart before they do it. I love the third-party deals.
…as for that part of the world, it wouldn’t surprise me if the Google employee took a bribe to cut a deal to release the ip of the original bastard blogger who posted that the original guy took a bribe.
Why are all the Google recruiters leaving? Sr. people leaving Google as well
#33 exactly what I was thinking.
Micheal how do keep letting this guy post inflamitory shit with out first party sources? I am no beacon of truth myself, but then again my blog isn’t becoming know as a news source; this one is.
Convictus - this is exactly how things are supposed to work. The Globe is generally seen as a reputable publication. They are apparently printing a retraction today. Our update was made as soon as Google contacted us. The story is evolving real time.
It’s ridiculous to assume that we will always wait for a comment from the company. Most of the time the response is “no comment.” If you think through your comment carefully, you’ll see that companies could spin the news any way they want simply by not responding to press, thereby freezing everyone. funny. Anyway, carry on. I didn’t mean to get in the way of your trolling.
So, ladies and gentlemen, please don’t bitch about China on the same subject.. this is a universal thing, and not a thing unique to China.
Note that I’m not saying whether it’s evil or not evil. All I’m saying is, it’s a universal thing, not a China thing.
Thanks for adding the update to mention that a court ordered this.
Now, how about updating http://www.techcrunch.com/2007.....yperthnet/ to point out the the reason that site was removed from Google was because it was hacked and was showing spammy links? The whole story is there in the comments between me and the site owner.
Duncan, learn from your mistakes.
interesting to see that Matt Cutts responded and talks about why a site was removed from google. while this was a bad example, there are a lot of sites that are penalized in google for no apparent good reason and that is the point of the post (not linking to bad neighborhoods, dup content etc).
This brings up the bigger issue that google is not responsive to webmasters who want to know why their site got the -950 penalty. btw Matt, the webmaster tools form is a joke. no one ever answers and having to check the box that you somehow violated Google’s terms of service is insulting! Trying to figure out why a site is penalized from the “terms of service” is an exercise in reading tea leaves.
So the point of the article is valid, and I for one would like to see more posts on this very topic.
How does protecting your privacy by not revealing an IP address work when you have to show up in court to argue why you shouldn’t have your IP address revealed? Once you show up in court, they know who you are, so knowing the IP address is meaningless. They aren’t looking to collect IP addresses, they’re looking for a person, and they figured the first step in tracking the guy down is to get his IP address.
The law is law and even Google must obey a court order.
But comment 24 (Yair Zarka) is saying that Google can sue ThechCrunch (according to the law they obeyed) for braking their “good” name.
Hope they won’t take me to the court for the double quotes
Let’s make a point here: If Google obeys all laws (in red China and in free USA) then Google is out of the law.
Aww…get over it folks, we all make mistakes. Part of the learning process.
At least TC corrects and admits to their mistakes, and not make silly attempts to cover them up.
There is no comparison to the China privacy cases and this specific case in Israel:
China summarily jails and tortures over political speech; no American corporation should cooperate or condone the misuse of their service to enable that.
In the Israeli defamation case, there was a case of prima facia slander that worked its way through the legal system.
way to go Duncan, now you have Google pissed at you.
The Mossad, Aman, and Shin Bet, can be quite persuasive. To arm chair this thousands of miles away will not do justice to anything. It looks bad for Google at this point. The Israeli has a habit to work in secret and very good on “digging” for the truth. In a country where you have to fight for your survival daily, I don’t think civil liberty is as liberal as it is here in the USA. It’s a slippery slope where it should ends, do you know where that line is? So who is willing to give up their live to be a martyr for this case?
If you do not want to go to jail, then don’t take chances. Well if you must do it, using your own personal Google account and home IP address sounds rather foolish don’t you think?
Just because we have an internet with a potentially huge audience, it doesn’t give the right to malign others and then hide in anonymity. I say, let the courts decide whether a crime is committed and then out (and punish) the people responsible. Too many have been harmed already by malicious creatures who say it’s a free speech issue.
Are Google stupid or do they just think we’re stupid? A blogger who obviously wants to protect his or her identity is supposed to show up in court to prevent having his or her identity revealed via IP address? Makes perfect sense to me!
Plus what kind of court conducts official business VIA BLOG!? This is ridiculous.
They can’t do that! Can they?
I’m toast now….
http://fakesteveballmer.blogspot.com
What regulations do google follow exactly?
Is it USA or China ? many laws in developing countries just break people rights, and they are laws !!
We need official response from google, so I can decide to stay with google or go to another service provider
Things change over time,and we most adapt! Google now has changed dramatically:now Google,Yahoo,Microsoft…etc are MORE similar then different,they are the giants,the rich,the influential…and they do NOT care very much about the little people,but pretend to… And the USA changed even more dramatically!,the wide range of freedoms and rights,respect,privacy…etc=most are gone or drastically reduced!.So if you are one of the normal,everyday, average people:change your old habits,you ken-nut fight the big powerful,rich and influential corporations and individuals,and they ken-nut by trusted to protect you!.Be careful what company’s and countries you trust whit your data:medium-small companies in liberal countries are more safe!(the Scandinavian countries, Switzerland… etc);and even in that case take extra precautions to your safety and privacy!(NO personally identifiable data,and NOT from your IP!,use public-Internet,or from home use proxies, encrypted tunneling…etc; example: Tor+Privoxy…). Be safe and smart! :))
There is a new blog providing some English translations from the old blog and also from the judge’s verdict. Very interesting revelations about the plaintiffs.
Here is the link: http://shaarei-tikva.behirot.net
Wow, I’m impressed that google responded to the blog to clarify the situation.