And while I generally have a good opinion on them, a product like this just seems like a step too far and risks threatening the trust users have in them.
And while I generally have a good opinion on them, a product like this just seems like a step too far and risks threatening the trust users have in them.
> How we use information we collect
> We use the information we collect from all of our services to provide, maintain, protect and improve them, to develop new ones, and to protect Google and our users. We also use this information to offer you tailored content – like giving you more relevant search results and ads.
[...]
> We will ask for your consent before using information for a purpose other than those that are set out in this Privacy Policy.
I don't think trading for profit on information a user would reasonably expect to be private (search history, browsing history, email) could reasonably be construed to fall into any of those categories, however the definition of "services" in "develop new [services]" is a bit of a joker. Google Hedge Fund anyone?
In the G Suite contract, do customers indemnify Google from damages above a certain amount for privacy breaches? I haven't seen the T&Cs, just the privacy policy.
> In the G Suite contract, do customers indemnify Google from damages above a certain amount for privacy breaches?
I don't see how they wouldn't.
As such, they do not have "enormous troves of trojan horse data" as they are not allowed (by their own terms) to use it for anything unrelated to the company itself.
Google knows more about worker habits than employers. They know more about your city than your municipality. Etc. Etc.
Do the principles and policies you know of have some kind of ethics angle, or is it just about the (quite real) risk of bad PR that could harm the magic cookies driving the ad business?
It would probably be illegal for an employee to do this though without Google's consent; wasn't there a case of a few Chase(?) employees trading on credit card data and being fired and prosecuted?
If a company used Google Apps for their business email and someone at Google found out about a merger by reading about it in an email that they got from the CEO's email, that would be insider trading because the CEO is an insider and would have had a reasonable expectation that Google would keep their email confidential.
On the other hand, if the CEO by mistake sent an email about the merger to someone who used Gmail who was not an insider, that would not be insider trading because the person who had the expectation of confidentiality was not an insider.