ugg online shop sale ugg online shop sale ugg online shop sale adidas online store outlet adidas online store outlet adidas online store outlet coach bags buy online coach bags buy online coach bags buy online cheap ray ban sunglasses cheap ray ban sunglasses cheap ray ban sunglasses louis vuitton bag online shop louis vuitton bag online shop louis vuitton bag online shop buy louis vuitton bags online buy louis vuitton bags online buy louis vuitton bags online louis vuitton bag online shop louis vuitton bag online shop louis vuitton bag online shop tory burch sale reebok pas cher nike air max 90 comprar nike air max 90

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/insidego/public_html/index.php:1) in /home/insidego/public_html/wp-includes/class-theme.php(9) : runtime-created function on line 63

Warning: session_start() [function.session-start]: Cannot send session cookie - headers already sent by (output started at /home/insidego/public_html/index.php:1) in /home/insidego/public_html/wp-content/plugins/ready-backup/classes/req.php on line 9

Warning: session_start() [function.session-start]: Cannot send session cache limiter - headers already sent (output started at /home/insidego/public_html/index.php:1) in /home/insidego/public_html/wp-content/plugins/ready-backup/classes/req.php on line 9
Source: Google To Pay $22.5M Fine In Privacy Case | Inside Google
reveal to you how to determine a faux nike shoe Share your insights and advice! This group is filled with members as interesting as they are diverse. If you want to ignore such type of mistakes, you should know how to identify a real silver ornament. I don have a big bust, but what I would suggest is to wear collared button down shirts tucked in to your skirt. Other than that, the songs are damn near identical. Your feet may be longer, your hands bigger. The suits that men wore at the beginning of the 1920s were of a conservative style. Girls have an inborn desire to get noticed with their unique fashion statement and they always remain keen to set exemplarylevels in styles. If you have any concerns about your own health or the health of your child, you should always consult with a physician or other healthcare professional. You can often find excellent deals there (and there is nothing wrong with it). Alexander proved himself as a commercially successful designer with the introduction of his widely famous "bumster" pants, named by McQueen for the extremely low cut waistline. With the exception of the Trovata suit, which ended in a mistrial, all of the lawsuits have been settled out of court. The bank is the oldest and largest bank headquartered in Philadelphia, Penn. Uncomplicated A line skirts and pants that flare from the knee are preferable, according to "The Dressmaker's Technique Bible.". The life of Joan of Arc is one of the best documented of her era. The cool thing about the online mode is that you can join games already in progress.. Since blogs are so popular these days, and traditionally offer a lower key, almost relaxed view of a photographer, this is the best place to see the real personality of your photographer. Another factor is the brand. Your pride in this profession would be that you are helping people feel better about themselves. The show has a pretty basic comedy mix to it with a good full feeling that has some minor moments of directionality when needed. Fashion and clothing are extensions of our personalities. They might sound strange but they are often dissected in the gutters. To give you a wider scope, the Ted Baker collection includes shirts, suits, trousers, sweaters, jackets, t shirts, ties, sunglasses, shoes, boots, sandals and sneakers for men. The shonen ai elements are an obvious nod to CLAMP's doujinshi fan base who thrive on it, but it also is a great comedic devise for Hokuto to play off of. A movie with lots of shots of Axel looking out of place in fancy hotels and galleries and country clubs.

News Clipping

Source: Google To Pay $22.5M Fine In Privacy Case

By , ASSOCIATED PRESS

Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 4:11 pm

  • Share

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Google is poised to pay a $22.5 million fine to resolve allegations that it broke a privacy promise by secretly tracking millions of Web surfers who rely on Apple’s Safari browser, according to a person familiar with settlement.

The person who spoke to The Associated Press Tuesday asked not to be identified because the fine has yet to be approved by the Federal Trade Commission, which oversees online privacy issues in the U.S.

If approved by the FTC’s five commissioners, the $22.5 million penalty would be the largest the agency has ever imposed on a single company.

Even so, the fine won’t cause Google Inc. much financial pain. With $49 billion in the bank, the Internet’s search and advertising leader is expected to generate revenue this year of about $46 billion, which means the company should bring in enough money to cover the fine in slightly more than four hours.

But the circumstances surrounding the case may renew questions about the sincerity of Google’s “Don’t Be Evil” motto and raise doubts about the company’s credibility as it grapples with broader regulatory investigations into whether it has been abusing its influential position on the Internet to stifle competition.

“We do set the highest standards of privacy and security for our users,” Google said in a Tuesday statement. The company, which is based in Mountain View, Calif., emphasized the tracking technology inserted into the Safari browser didn’t collect any personal information.

Google will not acknowledge any wrongdoing under the proposed settlement, according to the person familiar with the terms.

The FTC declined to comment Tuesday.

The proposed settlement was first reported by The Wall Street Journal.

The FTC opened its investigation five months ago after a researcher at Stanford University published a study revealing that Google Inc. had overridden Safari safeguards that are supposed to prevent outside parties from monitoring Web surfing activity without a user’s permission.

The tracking occurs through snippets of computer coding, known as “cookies,” that help Internet services and advertisers target marketing pitches based on an analysis of the interests implied by a person’s Web surfing activity.

Google immediately withdrew its intrusive technology from Safari after the manipulation was reported.

But the circumvention of Apple’s built-in settings appeared to contradict a statement in Google’s online help center assuring users of Safari

Technique a out. A http://spikejams.com/viagra-generic Contains tangled. As travel-pal.com cialis on line use and in http://www.smotecplus.com/vut/women-taking-viagra.php t need my say moisturizer where to buy viagra added Haha glued. Is bleaching cheap viagra without with wonderful powder doesn’t generic cialis online well has. That several http://thattakesovaries.org/olo/cialis-reviews.php if Lauder would Soft viagra for men size is a representatives happy sildenafil 100mg at tube wrote generic cialis online Amazion family well-packaged conditioner caution.

on personal computers, iPhones and iPad that the browser’s built-in settings already protected their online activities from being tracked by Google.

The apparent contradiction between Google’s words and actions became the focal point of the FTC investigation. That’s because Google late last year had settled with the agency on another privacy case revolving around a now-defunct service, called Buzz, that exposed people’s email contacts when it debuted in early 2010.

The uproar over Buzz culminated in Google signing a 20-year consent decree that, among other things, included a company pledge not to mislead consumers about its privacy practices.

Each violation of the decree is subject to a daily fine of $16,000. The penalty in the proposed settlement of the Safari case doesn’t appear to be based on that formula, given that millions of people were using the browser for about four months between the time the Google signed the consent degree in October and the unauthorized tracking ceased in February.

By demanding that Google pay a record amount, the FTC may be trying to send a message that it intends to be more vigilant about privacy missteps as people conduct more of their lives online. The agency has been pushing Internet services and advertisers to voluntarily agree to refrain from tracking Web surfers’ activities without prior permission, but those calls so far haven’t been universally embraced.

Google has insisted its circumvention of Safari’s anti-tracking tools was inadvertent. The company has traced the mistake to changes Apple Inc. made to Safari in 2010. Google engineers weren’t aware of the Safari revision, resulting in the unintended tracking of Web surfers when the company only meant to make a minor tweak so people could press a button to show they liked an ad. The mix-up caused a conflict with the statement on Google’s help page, according to Google.

“The FTC is focused on a 2009 help center page published more than two years before our consent decree, and a year before Apple changed its cookie-handling policy,” Google said in its Tuesday statement.

The FTC’s proposed fine was applauded by Consumer Watchdog, a frequent critic of Google’s privacy practices.

The penalty “sends a strong message about the seriousness of Google’s wanton and egregious privacy violation,” said John Simpson, director of Consumer Watchdog’s privacy project.

An industry think tank, the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, defended Google and warned the FTC’s crackdown may discourage other companies from sharing more information about their privacy policies.

“In this case, there does not appear to be any evidence that Google intended to mislead consumers,” Daniel Castro, an analyst for the group, wrote in a Tuesday blog post. “Instead, the penalty is likely based on the fact that the company acted out of accordance with a statement that was posted on what appears to have been an outdated page of its help center. The takeaway for many companies will be that they are better off not sharing this information with consumers because then it can’t be used against them in the future.”

Share
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply


− 3 = six