Canadian Supreme Court orders Global Google Search Term Ban - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: CharlieWorton
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 28, 2017, 09:02:39 pm
content: This is bizarre, and interesting on a whole bunch of different levels. Here's a link to the story:http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/supreme-court-upholds-worldwide-order-directing-google-to-block-content-1.3479912A B.C. company called Equustek developed a specialized device that allowed specialized data equipment from differing companies to easily exchange data with each other. Lots of engineering, big success, jobs created, etc.They engaged the services of another company, Datalink, to sell their portals. But it wasn't long before they discovered that Datalink was removing Equustek labels, and selling the equipment as their own. Later, if I understand the story correctly, Datalink had the boards reverse engineered and started manufacturing and selling the equipment directly. Direct violation of a whole bunch of patents.Equustek cried foul, and moved to get the company shut down. But the company would jump from country to country, while continuing to sell equipment through their website.So Equustek moved to have the company removed from Google searches, and that order was granted by the B.C. provincial court. But Google refused to comply, and the matter was referred to the Canadian Supreme Court.Today, in a 7-2 decision, the Canadian Supreme Court ordered Google to enforce a global ban on searches for Datalink.This is interesting, in that a relatively small country - 99.5% of all humans do Not live in Canada - has been able to force policies that affect the global population. From Google's point of view, they must either comply, or shutter their operations in Canada.I am in total agreement with Equusteks desire to enforce every legal means at their disposal to shut down Datalink.But what happens when middle eastern countries decide that Google must stop searches for Porn, or cease to operate in the middle east? What happens when some U.S. states decide that Google must stop searches for Abortion Clinics, or cease operations in that state?If I were Datalink, I'd just change the name of my company to 'superlink' and carry on as before.And it's important to note that while this restriction applies to Google, it does not apply to Yahoo, Duck Duck Go, Bing, or all the other search engines.So... I'm kinda thinking that forcing just Google to follow this policy is unfair to Google. It should have been a ban on all major search engines.And secondly, I don't think this will harm Datalink. They'll just change their name and carry on.Finally, it sets a dangerous precedent - where a small group of people can enforce their beliefs on the global population. I think there's something really bad there.What are your thoughts?>Charlie

author: retrolefty
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 28, 2017, 09:52:33 pm
content: Yes, the internet is still a brave new world. I suspect we will see more and more governments try an impose their will, however I always though that it would be a national type ban, firewalling in and out, rather then attempting a global ban. Goggle is indeed having to deal with a lot of stuff these days, but they have the size and income to make fighting it worth their while I guess.

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 28, 2017, 10:00:47 pm
content: I think tat I left Canada just at the right time. First enforced use of pronouns for self identifying genders, making the criticism of Islam a racist hate speech offense, and not this? Wow....

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 28, 2017, 10:04:57 pm
content: Maybe just remove Google access from the 0.5% of human beings who live in Canada and leave the rest of us alone. I WANT to be able to search for Datalink (I don't know why...). I suspect Google won't comply and this case will become an international incident. The Supreme Court of Canada has no jurisdiction outside of Canada.I have the same problem with the new EU fine against Google. Nobody was forcing anybody in the EU to use Google. Google runs it search business to benefit Google and their stockholders. If folks don't like the way Google categorizes advertisements, they can use any other search engine they want - it's a free world!. Were I Google, I would simply block all EU countries, forever! I would certainly not pay the EU fine.Of course I would have taken the same position were I Microsoft when the EU fined them for including Internet Explorer and not including every other browser in the world. For Pete's sake, the EU users could have just ignored IE and downloaded whatever they wanted. Of course, they would have had to buy a CD version because it would be too painful to use IE to download something else. So, again, were I Microsoft, I would have pulled my products from the EU, cancelled licenses (if allowed by the EUA) and blocked any kind of support or updates. If EU folks wanted Microsoft products, they could buy them from retailers in the US, under US law, and pay the import fees. If that decision ultimately drove EU users to Linux, they would be decades behind where they are today. But, no, Microsoft caved! To extortion!The EU has a habit of fining American companies that trounce the EU competition. Or, for any other reason they can dream up.

author: ConKbot
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 28, 2017, 11:17:51 pm
content: In for Google flipping the switch in Canada for a day. No Google ads, no gmail, no Google play store, no YouTube, no setting up a new or freshly reset android phone. Would make for an interesting day.

author: WastelandTek
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 28, 2017, 11:27:15 pm
content: I think Equusteks should contract with a military mercenary outfit and call in a drone strike.

author: Red Squirrel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2017, 12:18:24 am
content: Quote from: Lightages on June 28, 2017, 10:00:47 pmYeah this kind of stuff makes me ashamed of my country. We are turning as bad, if worse than the US when it comes to this kind of crap.IP laws in general are ridiculous now, it's a tool designed to halt freedom. That's all it is now. It's not even about protecting artists or creators, it's only about corporate interests. It's completely ridiculous that a search engine can be ordered to alter search results for the sake of it. A search engine should be 100% neutral and should not be forced to change results based on any kind of agenda.

author: CharlieWorton
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2017, 02:47:15 am
content: Where Google is now: they can comply with the Supreme Court ruling, or they can cease all operations in Canada until such time as the ruling is reversed. Those are the options.QuoteWikipedia did that for a day, and it really captured a lot of attention. Frankly, I wouldn't mind seeing all of Google's alphabet soup products made unavailable in Canada for a while. Even though I'm a Canadian and would truly miss the products and services that Google provides, I really do feel that the Supreme Court has overstepped its bounds. You get to enforce your will in Canada, but no where else.QuoteYep. We're getting to the point that the law is proving inadequate to deal with such matters. Too bad that all the 'hitman for hire' ads in the mercenary magazines are actually sting operations.And on top of everything else, the Supreme Court decision would be completely ineffective. Pirate Bay is still rocking with the lights on, despite being the number one target of the MPAA for well over a decade. Technical blockades take too much time to set up, and are too easily thwarted.What should actually have happened is a criminal warrant issued for the arrest of the individual involved. That warrant, enforceable in every country with an extradition treaty with Canada, would bring the matter to a screeching halt in very short order.I love my country, and for good reason; Canada does a ton of wonderful things for its citizens. But she occasionally screws up, and I think that this is one of those times.>Charlie

author: ConKbot
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2017, 02:48:14 am
content: I forgot about googles DMCA takedown shenanigans. If something is blocked because of a DMCA request. At the bottom there is "x Entries removed bla bla DMCA request, click here to see entries removed and claimant" or something along the lines of that.I could see them thumbing their nose at the Canada supreme court and make it the search results be empty, with a notice "Error blocked keyword in Canada, auto-redirecting to List of blocked results and reason in 5 seconds" And having removed them from the search results and have them on a list of blocked entries which totally isnt search results, so technically complying. Though not as exciting as "lol k, flipping the switch on your dumb ass"Or replace every google ad with an autoplay with video with sound "Error unable to load google content in your county, please contact your representative at (insert phone number, email and address determined from IP geolocation and looking up corresponding representative )"While its nothing new that big corporations can influence the government, () it would be interesting, philosophically, to see one that can influence the government, rapidly, via the public rather than greasing the right palms.

author: edpalmer42
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2017, 03:19:33 am
content: This is just another case where the laws haven't kept up with technology. The Supreme Court has the unenviable job of trying to apply horse-and-carriage laws to a Tesla world.Now that the court has ruled, the only ways for Google to avoid enforcing this ban in Canada are an appeal to the same people that just ruled against them (I think they can do that), or lobby the federal government to change the law. It would be interesting to see what happened if they blocked the results in Canada and still had it available in other parts of the world. Would the Supreme Court find them in contempt for not enforcing the ban worldwide? Can they really do that?This has nothing to do with censorship, freedom of speech, or politics. It's about a company that stole another company's idea. Companies big and small have been fighting about this stuff for centuries. The only new wrinkle here is that the thieves are jumping around the planet to avoid getting caught and the Internet allows them to do that and continue their illegal business.Ed

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2017, 04:21:32 am
content: While sad that there's illegal stuff going on, I don't think any country has the right to control a company's international business unless that company only served countries within an alliance. Since Canada does not have an alliance with the entire planet, they have no say what happens elsewhere. HOWEVER, they might bring NATO into this and possibly try to enforce it within NATO countries but I doubt it would ever get to that level of diplomacy unless it became a major threat to the country's economy (which it won't, it's just a patent scam).Plus, blocking a search result on Google will not stop people from buying counterfeit goods...'CAUSE GUESS WHAT...TELL THE (bleep)ING IDIOTS ABOUT YAHOO, let alone the deepweb...

author: BrianHG
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2017, 05:02:32 am
content: Searching about information shouldn't be blocked.If Canada's court rules a Canadian business to be breaking a law, fine them and/or close them down.Canada should not have the right to burn all publications unless you want to give to Canadian government the right to censor and erase information which has already existed in the public domain, as in it has been published.I hope Google ignores the Canadian government on this one, but, it seems they already blocked searches on Google.ca alone which means Google has a blocking capability in place and the might just do a world wide block since it's for 1 tiny indiscreet company of no true worldwide consequences. This goes along the lines of burning history books, science/chemistry books, technical documents because they contain information you may today consider illegal.

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2017, 02:06:12 pm
content: Quote from: CharlieWorton on June 29, 2017, 02:47:15 amBut Google may not be 'doing business' in Canada. Where are the servers? If the Canadians are networking across their border into servers located in the US, shame on them. They should know better!I really don't have any idea how extensive Google's physical presence is in Canada. If they have a presence, the Canadian Supreme Court probably has jurisdiction over that presence. If they don't have a presence, the Canadian government can block Google at the border (routers) I suppose.The flip side works as well. There was some issue with exporting encryption from the US so the developers of OpenBSD had to host their files in Canada where there was no such restriction.It plays both ways.

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2017, 02:18:06 pm
content: Quote from: rstofer on June 28, 2017, 10:04:57 pmagreed that google being fined by the EU is complete bullshit, i recall that the thing with microsoft was a bit different. you were forced to install IE garbage and you can't really uninstall it. It's not like google that has the biggest share because most of its competitors are garbageanyway a "better" way to do what canada is doing would be to block the access to the websites IPs. They do it all the time here for streaming websites (and it works soooo well.. nevermind)I think they only want to set the precedent

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 29, 2017, 02:25:10 pm
content: Quote from: CharlieWorton on June 28, 2017, 09:02:39 pmEasy choice, tell Canada to get stuffed.

author: MarkS
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 29, 2017, 02:30:08 pm
content: Internet companies based in the U.S. are in rather tricky legal jeopardy with these rulings. If Google complies, a U.S. entity (person, company, whatever) could--and probably SHOULD, sue for violation of First Amendment rights; a suit the entity would almost surely win. Then what? Which court ruling do they follow?

author: tronde
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2017, 03:49:39 pm
content: Quote from: rstofer on June 28, 2017, 10:04:57 pmEU has a habit to fine EU companies as well, so stop crying about that. Volkswagen and Opel was among the first companies being fined.

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2017, 04:31:55 pm
content: Quote from: tronde on June 29, 2017, 03:49:39 pmFor competition or fraud? Seems to me that cheating the smog laws is fraud, simple as that. Not presenting the ad responses in a particular order that some whiny country wants is a competitive matter, not fraud!

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2017, 04:39:37 pm
content: Quote from: MarkS on June 29, 2017, 02:30:08 pmAs I said earlier, Google should just block Canada. It's a Canadian ruling, it should impact only Canada. The only real question is whether to block Canada's access to the search engine or all of Google services (gmail, Chrome, Android). After all, we wouldn't want to leave any kind of work-around.What I can't imagine is what the court was thinking. How did they think this was going to work out? Do they really expect Google to comply? Or are they just trying to start an international incident with the US? Are the judges smoking something?

author: tronde
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2017, 07:31:51 pm
content: Quote from: rstofer on June 29, 2017, 04:31:55 pmFined for competition. If I remember correct, Volkswagen got in trouble for some kind of market sharing and Opel because it denied service documentation to independent workshops. It has also been something related to other car manufacturers, but I have forgot the details. It seems the fines did what they was expected to do.Volvo/Renault, DAF, Daimler and IVECO got some heavy fines last year for competition in the truck maket and there has been several other cases, so they don't just chase US companies. It just seems so because the US companies are well known to the public and the cases makes some headlines.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 29, 2017, 07:59:18 pm
content: I can't see how canada can make a law for the rest of the world. I feel for the company that are the victim of their products being copied but this is the wrong approach. If they have patents etc they should pursue the company directly in court.If it comes to things like this related to the internet that affect the whole world it should be high time for a worldwide body to be formed and perhaps they can start dealing with the real criminals stuff that is out of reach of one countries law enforcement, I think a notable example being things like child porn hosted in countries that don't give a stuff.

author: WastelandTek
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2017, 08:24:07 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on June 29, 2017, 07:59:18 pmthat right there is one slippery ass slope

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 29, 2017, 08:28:05 pm
content: why ? the internet is global, it needs treating globally so that no one country can make laws that affect others. A a parallel problem is that of haulage companies in ,the UK that get shut down because their lorries are unsafe and they kill people, they go to bulgaria and get a new licence to operate and with the EU and all that this licence is valid in the UK, so the law can be circumvented, the same happens with websites doing illegal things, they make sure they operate from a country where they won't get shut down. And we hear all the time about people committing a crime in one country but coming from another where they have history but the country they move to knows nothing of that. World wide law and order is something that needs to be developed if we are to stay safe and also free from other countries interference like is implied in this case.

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2017, 08:28:36 pm
content: Quote from: CharlieWorton on June 28, 2017, 09:02:39 pmYou know nothing about Google China?Oh, my sweet summer child...(In short: yes, they can, and do, comply with the laws of every country they operate within.)Tim

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 29, 2017, 08:29:49 pm
content: quite, countries like china just have a nationwide firewall and replace things like facebook, twitter and google with their own versions, carefully crafted for the peace of mind of their own citizens.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 29, 2017, 08:47:46 pm
content: The point is most people in china hopefully know that google is banned, and hopefully they understand why and what is wring with the situation they live in.Back in the cold war days Russia's first man into space toured the world, then strangely "died in an accident"

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 29, 2017, 10:20:20 pm
content: Quote from: ConKbot on June 28, 2017, 11:17:51 pmI would seriously do that if I was in charge of Google and a country tried to impose it's will on what asearch enginecan and can't index.Google are in the box seat. They could reach almost every Canadian citizen instantly, and with a customised message telling them why they have been blocked and stating their case.Canada would change it's stance quick smart or they become a backwater country overnight.

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 30, 2017, 07:02:19 pm
content: Quote from: blueskull on June 29, 2017, 08:40:12 pmThanks for clarifying!

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 30, 2017, 09:33:14 pm
content: Quote from: rstofer on June 28, 2017, 10:04:57 pmTo do business in any country, you have to obide by its rules, including any fines they saddle you with, whether you think its fair or not.QuoteThat's silly. If enough people used Linux then more people would write commercial software and drivers for it, so no one would get left behind.No company or product is irreplaceable. China does very well without Google, just like the EU would do just as well without Windows.

author: donotdespisethesnake
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 01, 2017, 02:27:51 pm
content: Quote from: CharlieWorton on June 28, 2017, 09:02:39 pmAs far as I see, there are no patents involved. The plaintiff claims breach of trade secrets. The respondent hired an engineer that used to work for the plaintiff, it is alleged he took trade secrets with him.Also worth noting, this injunction is pending a trial - no court has yet ruled whether trade secrets were breached (even if it appears likely). Companies re-badge, re-engineer other companies products as well as hire engineers from competitors all the time, it's standard part of competitive market.The injunction looks like massive overkill, and the plaintiff's case looks more like an attempt to scare off inconvenient competition.

author: SkyMaster
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 01, 2017, 02:49:38 pm
content: Quote from: donotdespisethesnake on July 01, 2017, 02:27:51 pmThe way "Datalink Technologies" operates appear to be very shady; it does not seem to be a honest company at all:http://www.equustek.info/datalink-aliases.htmlThe following is a list of some of the aliases used by DatalinkDatalink Technologies Group IncDatalink Technologies Inc.Datalink Communication Products and Technology Inc.Datalink Solutions IncDatalink Technologies Group Canada IncDatalink Technologies IncDatalink Systems Inc.Datalink Technologies Gateways IncDatalink Technologies Gateways, LLCData Tec Inc.The telephone numbers are actually answered by a company named Re: Messaging Solutions Inc., in Abbotsford, BC, and are forwarded to Datalink, wherever it is The address in Ferndale, Washington, is actually that of a mail drop company, International Market Access which " exists to help Canadian companies market and distribute profitably in the United States ".The address in Tuscon, Arizona is actually that of Speedmail Plus, who “can handle all of your packaging, mailing and shipping needs”. The only director is Morgan Jack of unknown address. He was born in Thunder Bay, Ontario and has operated the various Datalink companies out of Vancouver, Canada, for at least the last ten years. Mr. Jack sold the two Vancouver residential condominiums that he owned through a convoluted family relationship after the litigation began.Datalink is not listed with Worksafe BC as all companies that have employees must be in order to operate in British Columbia. The company has not responded to the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia’s (APEGBC) request for clarification of its claims to providing engineering services.This is what Datalink says on its websites: In 2012, our operations are staffed by employees networked together in various offices and locations in North America. Business locations includes Vancouver, Canada; Ferndale WA; Tucson AZ; and Queretaro Mexico. These locations are interconnected using the latest communications technology that enables us to provide the greatest level of customer service We don’t know about Queretaro, Mexico; but all of the other locations are mail-drops.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 01, 2017, 02:56:42 pm
content: I think that here needs to be more choices in search engines. Until a few years ago here was a much wider choice, but in the last few years the others have mostly vanished.Even search engines like Duck Duck Go that purport to be an alternative to Google seem to get their results from them. The problem is, Google has become a de-facto global monopoly.I feel that competition is so very necessary in the search engine arena, that for that and other reasons Google should be broken up into multiple entities.Also, the ubiquity of all the various large services, particularly in email, is frankly, terrifying.The decentralizatio of the early Internet was one of its most appealing and useful aspects.Google is not morally superior to any other company. Its arguable that they have become too powerful.Its telling that their old motto, "don't be evil" has been discarded with the move to "Alphabet".Eventually this is likely to lead to a backlash against technology generally. The failure of society to anticipate the problems that are becoming inevitable with amoral trade agreements between increasingly despotic and corrupt countries and amoral corporations is a very serious one.Now if one country gets back doors, they all have a right to equal access to them, for example. It makes no difference whatsoever how much or little respect any of the actors have for anything. In other words, if Hitler or Stalin were alive today and in charge of some nation, its likely that all the MNCs would owe them every bit of assistance they rendered to anybody else.Its likely this absolution from any civil responsibilities will become even more explicit and the problem of utterly amoral corporate action immeasurably worse with what I have seen so far of the pending (plurilateral) international services agreement. (readable at bilaterals.org and wikileaks)(Which is intended to be merged with the existing body of agreements, including the services and telecommunications treaties from Geneva).This means that already extremely powerful corporations such as   and  will get absolved at an international level for any blanket censorship they do at any level or for any reason for themselves or for any other entity, especially governments, no matter how small or demonstrably evil. This is a power that governments have never had before and it represents a sort of circling of the wagons by governments -many whose legitimacy is increasingly debatable, circling their wagons literally. A return to the "divine right of kings" moral justification for government is also occurring, since many governments lack the legitimacy of having been elected and the agreements dont want to leave them out. So the new international government is being set up compleely stripped of democracy or even lip service to it, with the only entities given standing are sitting governments of all kinds and corporations.There are thousands of implications to this.One, just one is that it will mean that for those of us who get some of our knowledge of the world from online sources, or over online devices of any kind, the possibility now exists of presenting people as a whole or individually, or by any selector which can be thought up, with totally manipulated content and having them think that is "the world" and there is absolutely no legal remedy for this manipulation. This capability could be used to set different groups against one another for any purpose at all.In that world, democracy cannot exist in any meaningful manner and indeed its my personal suspicion that that's likely the intent.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 01, 2017, 03:02:09 pm
content: The problem is that monopolies are convenient, the services google offers are nice and useful, I don't mind that my phone tracks where I go and provides me information that is useful. But this is all nice until the information is misused or hacked. Competitors offering the same service often does not work, Youtube is defacto, vimeo and other sites are never heard of, there seems to be a bit of a fight going on over cloud storage with dropbox, onedrive and google drive being the most well known, I think ultimately one may win out or no further competitors will break into the market. Gmail is taking over.

author: SkyMaster
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 01, 2017, 03:09:24 pm
content: Quote from: cdev on July 01, 2017, 02:56:42 pmIs this the Godwin's law (a.k.a. Godwin's rule of Hitler analogies) that everybody is talking about?

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 01, 2017, 06:18:20 pm
content: >Is this the Godwin's law (a.k.a. Godwin's rule of Hitler analogies) that everybody is talking about?Have you ever heard the term "thought terminating cliche"? It was coined by expert on cults, Robert J. LiftonWhat I'm trying to say is that societal mechanisms that previously limited the ability of totalitarian regimes to exert total control are now being rendered ineffectual by corporate-written free trade agreements that make it extremely easy for governments to control information. They might use corporate info as a proxy to create a legal precedent that they use to control all kinds of information.Including essential information.We've always had misinformation. Nothing has changed there.The push against "fake news" is really against real news that's inconvenient. So we should resist it. We're all grownups. For example, the healthcare situation in the US as depicted in the media and by politicians, now is almost totally fake. >> the real situation is described in here:https://www.citizen.org/sites/default/files/public-citizen-comments-on-international-services-agreement.pdfIt mentions an earlier FTA, which was part of the WTO - its behind a great many problems with services in the US, the UK and in a great many other countries. But the media doesn't allow any discussion of this. Despite it clearly being the cause. Why?This kind of thing should be a wake up call for all of us.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 01, 2017, 06:19:40 pm
content: We seem to be drifting off topic