Google has come under fire from both Republicans and Democrats for its invasions of privacy. Now Congress wants is holding its feet to the fire.
Democrats and Republicans from the House Energy and Commerce Committee penned an April 23 open letter to Google’s CEO over its Sensorvault database. They demanded answers from Google by May 7, followed with a briefing by May 10.
CNet described the original purpose of Sensorvault as “to collect information on the users of Google's products so the company can better target them with ads and see how effective those ads are.” Law enforcement has made extensive use of the database via “geofence” warrants. It has been depicted as so powerful it can “turn the business of tracking cellphone users’ locations into a digital dragnet for law enforcement.”
The New York Times continued by elaborating how “where you go, who your friends are, what you read, eat and watch, and when you do it — is being used for purposes many people never expected.” It has reportedly tracked “hundreds of millions of devices worldwide and dating back nearly a decade.”
The letter elaborated on congressional concerns that "The potential ramifications for consumer privacy are far reaching and concerning.” "We would like to know the purposes for which Google maintains the Sensorvault database and the extent to which Google shares precise location information from this database with third parties," they wrote.
[ads:im:1]
While Google did not address the letter directly, a spokesman claimed that the company collects data for its Location History feature.
"If a user chooses to turn it on, we can provide helpful information, like real-time data to help them beat traffic on their way home from work," the spokesman said. "They can delete their Location History data, or turn off the product entirely, at any time."
At face value, these comments seem to contradict the terms discussed earlier this year. Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) scorched Google’s senior privacy counsel Will DeVries over user privacy concerns on March 14.
DeVries’ defense was that the technologies and services being discussed would not be possible without comprehensive tracking of user locations.
Hawley was not impressed: “I think when somebody turns off their user information, their location history, they expect their location tracking to be off, but it is not,” he then added “In fact, they don’t have a way, apparently, to turn it off.”
[ads:im:2]
