"Rocky Mountain Bank, working with Google (through court order), confirmed on Thursday of last week that the e-mail containing client information was never opened and has now been permanently destroyed by Google's system," Tina Martinez, general counsel for Rocky Mountain Capital, wrote in an e-mail response to questions.
"As a result, no customer data of any sort has been viewed or used by any inappropriate user during this data lapse," Martinez wrote
So basically they got unbelievably lucky. It doesn't change the fact that Google was prepared to bust down this guy's virtual door because someone said they accidentally slipped some data in his mail-slot.
I think what's troubling is really a combination of two independent circumstances.
First, one company has access to tons of my personal data. I trust this company, they seem well intentioned and they have a very reasonable privacy policy. It's also extremely useful to me to have all of my data (email, personal contacts, calendar) in one place and accessible via a web-interface.
However, when you throw in the second variable, namely, the mixed-bag which is the US judicial system it can all be torpedoed with the flick of a wrist.
I really would have preferred to have seen the judge tell the bank "tough shit" and have someone (either the email recipient or EFF) put up more of a legal resistance to this court order.
True, the court system is rather unpredictable in this new territory. To me it seems reasonably fair though - as the owner of the account was unreachable, and many other people's private data was at stake. I would say that Google followed the rules properly, even if the bank didn't.
I found the Liskula Cohen blogger case much more troublesome, and the ongoing TCI Journal case is especially disturbing.
Comments
"Rocky Mountain Bank, working with Google (through court order), confirmed on Thursday of last week that the e-mail containing client information was never opened and has now been permanently destroyed by Google's system," Tina Martinez, general counsel for Rocky Mountain Capital, wrote in an e-mail response to questions. "As a result, no customer data of any sort has been viewed or used by any inappropriate user during this data lapse," Martinez wrote
So basically they got unbelievably lucky. It doesn't change the fact that Google was prepared to bust down this guy's virtual door because someone said they accidentally slipped some data in his mail-slot.
It's still all very troubling.
To be fair to Google, they did nothing until ordered by a US court. Is there any more you can ask?
I think what's troubling is really a combination of two independent circumstances.
First, one company has access to tons of my personal data. I trust this company, they seem well intentioned and they have a very reasonable privacy policy. It's also extremely useful to me to have all of my data (email, personal contacts, calendar) in one place and accessible via a web-interface.
However, when you throw in the second variable, namely, the mixed-bag which is the US judicial system it can all be torpedoed with the flick of a wrist.
I really would have preferred to have seen the judge tell the bank "tough shit" and have someone (either the email recipient or EFF) put up more of a legal resistance to this court order.
True, the court system is rather unpredictable in this new territory. To me it seems reasonably fair though - as the owner of the account was unreachable, and many other people's private data was at stake. I would say that Google followed the rules properly, even if the bank didn't.
I found the Liskula Cohen blogger case much more troublesome, and the ongoing TCI Journal case is especially disturbing.