So while we encourage the European regulators and Google to continue moving forward in productive conversations, we also remind both Google and European regulators that resolving this disagreement by balkanizing Google’s services won’t benefit users or innovation.
Reading EFF‘s take one “why are EU regulators getting tough with Google on privacy” was slightly disappointing. It shows that an organisation from one region making a clumsy attempt to have an opinion about another region’s handling and views on privacy.
In most of Europe still, we value privacy greatly. Especially when what happens in the USA often affects the European region.
It is also an absolute rubbish claim that demanding high standards of privacy and transparency will negatively affect users and innovation.
How can improving privacy and ensuring better transparency be bad for users? Is that even possible?
When it comes to innovation, all you need to look at is Open Source Software, where you have full access to the source code. And from what I can tell, Linux has been very successful and innovative while providing, most of the time, 100% transparency by letting anyone look under the hood of the software.
Of course they [Google] will make that claim. And it’s rather disappointing EFF choses to use such a biased piece of information. Ask any company how they are complying with any law in any country and they will all say they are 100% adhering to local laws.
Both as a reader and a journalist I would be more interested in a less biased source, someone that has no connection to Google whatsoever would be preferred.
EFF must learn and understand that most Europeans are [almost fanatically] obsessed with privacy in the same way US citizens are [almost fanatically] obsessed with freedom of speech.
If a company wants to do business in another country and another region, they need to swallow their pride and follow the laws which are within that country and region. And when it comes to privacy, there should not be any compromise. Because any weakening of privacy [laws] sets precedence for the future and opens the door to weaken it even more later on.