GeekwithEnvy

ruling

Google Scanning Your Gmail

by Leave a Comment

email security

Google has implemented some features into Gmail that scan your email. The company mentions that scanning you email is necessary in order to provide beneficial features like spam prevention, but not everyone is onboard with the idea.

A class-action lawsuit was brought against Google recently over the use of automated email scanning. Users felt that Google’s terms of service were unclear, at best, in explaining to users that their email would be scanned and what will happen with all of that information. Google immediately asked the U.S federal judge to dismiss the lawsuit stating that the automated email scanning process is fully disclosed to all Gmail users.

However, the judge did not dismiss the case and actually ruled yesterday that Google’s terms of service and privacy policies do not clearly state that they are intercepting user emails and profiling them. Google did try to defend it’s actions by stating that users are giving “implied consent” when signing up for an email service, but that defense didn’t hold. This is obviously going to be a problem for Google moving forward as they  implement more features that depend on scanning email content. Google will also need to draw up a more explicit version of their terms for Gmail users.

On the other side of ruling, we see a big win for online privacy, which is quickly disappearing in a more and more transparent digital world. While many understand the benefits of allowing such information to be collected, not every wants to consent, and even those who would  consent would still like to know how their information is being collected and used.

The ruling is available online in PDF format for you to read.

Ruling Says Digital Content Can’t Be Resold

by Leave a Comment

As digital content begins to play a bigger role in our society we have to begin to try to understand it more and that includes in what ways do we actually own our digital goods. When you make a digital purchase your not actually buying something physical.

It’s kind of strange to think about, but what we’re really doing is buying the rights to use the said digital goods. Some people have started to look at this and wondered that if we own specific rights to use something then we should be able to sell those rights to others and we would then be effectively forfeiting our own rights to use the content.Digital Lock

Sounds pretty straight forward right? I give my rights that I bought to you at a discounted price. Well, as always, there is going to be a huge debate on whether this kind of stuff is actually legal or not and considering this is all brand new, we’re going to have to work that out in court.

This is exactly what has just happened as a federal judge in a case involving Capitol Records v. ReDigi, has just ruled that attempting to resell digital goods is illegal.

The general idea keeping this kind of activity alive was based on the first-sale doctrine, which allows someone who has legally purchased copyrighted material to resell it. This sounds like it should apply to digital content as well but the judge decided that even though Redigi makes users confirm that they have no existing copies and that the uploader will no longer have access to the files after the transaction is made, they still make copies despite ReDigi’s efforts.

This presents a clear challenge for companies like Apple who have plans to offer up a type of “used digital content” system. This also makes it less appealing to move to an all digital platform as used movie, music, and gaming stores will become obsolete and there will be no similar alternative.