He's on a mission from Gawd to straighen up America and so he has the power to do this.
or so the reasoning goes if you read the presidential declaration on the McCain anti-torture legislation. larry On 1/19/06, Tim Heald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Insanity. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Gruss Gott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 2:39 PM > > To: CF-Community > > Subject: Feds Subpoena Google > > > > Google Gets Subpoena > > In Federal Porn Probe > > Associated Press > > January 19, 2006 1:37 p.m. > > > > The Bush administration, seeking to revive an online > > pornography law struck down by the Supreme Court, has > > subpoenaed Google Inc. for details on what its users have > > been looking for through its popular search engine. > > > > Google has refused to comply with the subpoena, issued last > > year, for a broad range of material from its databases, > > including a request for one million random Web addresses and > > records of all Google searches from any one-week period, > > lawyers for the U.S. Justice Department said in papers filed > > Wednesday in federal court in San Jose, Calif. > > > > Privacy advocates have been increasingly scrutinizing > > Google's practices as the company expands its offerings to > > include email, driving directions, photo-sharing, instant > > messaging and Web journals. > > > > Although Google pledges to protect personal information, the > > company's privacy policy says it complies with legal and > > government requests. > > Google also has no stated guidelines on how long it keeps > > data, leading critics to warn that retention is potentially > > forever given cheap storage costs. > > > > The government contends it needs the data to determine how > > often pornography shows up in online searches as part of an > > effort to revive an Internet child protection law that was > > struck down two years ago by the U.S. Supreme Court on > > free-speech grounds. > > > > The 1998 Child Online Protection Act would have required > > adults to use access codes or other ways of registering > > before they could see objectionable material online, and it > > would have punished violators with fines up to $50,000 or > > jail time. The high court ruled that technology such as > > filtering software may better protect children. > > > > The matter is now before a federal court in Pennsylvania, and > > the government wants the Google data to help argue that the > > law is more effective than software in protecting children from porn. > > > > The Mountain View, Calif.-based company told the San Jose > > Mercury News, which earlier reported the news, that it > > opposes releasing the information because it would violate > > the privacy rights of its users and would reveal company > > trade secrets. > > > > Nicole Wong, an associate general counsel for Google, said > > the company will fight the government's efforts "vigorously." > > > > "Google is not a party to this lawsuit, and the demand for > > the information is overreaching," Ms. Wong said. > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:193335 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
