Re: Ignorance and Stupidity
Be as pissed as you want, but make sure you have your facts right and put on your big-boy face or no one will take your whining seriously.
The point that Judge Koh was making, I believe, was that, while Gmail users had agreed to Google's Ts & Cs, NON-GMail-users who received messages from Gmail customers never had a chance to accept OR decline those Ts & Cs. Therefore, these are TWO different groups and can't be combined into one class.
"Even if that's the only choice on the menu, I do not give it to them."
Despite what you might want to believe, the Ts & Cs that you click that little box on that says "I agree to the Terms and Conditions of <NAME>." ARE a valid contract/agreement between Google and its users and that click-through means that you *DO* give them whatever those Ts & Cs say.
Also, despite what you may believe, if you don't like a company's Ts & Cs, your choices are either:
1 -- not to use the service, or;
2 -- to hold your nose and use it anyway -- and accept that there are things that you don't like, but that they are outweighed (in your estimation) by the parts of the service that you DO like enough to use it. Really, legally, there is no third option.
Actually, there IS a third option: You can argue that there has been a violation of LAW. That's what the courts rule on, not degree of butthurt. I don't believe that Judge Koh has said that the various suits may not go to trial, or even that the plaintiffs can't form discrete groups for purposes of taking Google to court -- Gmail users, non-users sending to/receiving from Gmail users, etc.; just that the categories of people claiming harm do not fall into one monolithic group ("class"), because not all had the same options available to them.
I'm not sure what "theft of services" you think Judge Koh is (allegedly) guilty of. From the article, it appears that she followed both the LETTER and the SPIRIT of the law, as a judge should. Now, the law may not be what you would LIKE it to be, but there you go.
Also, unless Larry Page and Sergei Brin came to every email user's house and physically assaulted them, then NO ONE was (per your original post) "literally raped" by Google. Whether they were FIGURATIVELY raped is left as an exercise for the student. (Personally, I prefer to reserve the use of the term "rape" to describe actual cases of... you know... RAPE, but clearly you have a different standard.)
Further, as others have noted, email should be considered to be a postcard, rather than a letter in an envelope. Bots are sent in clear and the postal workers along the way may or may not look at it. If you want your mail to be (more) private put it in an envelope (encrypt it) before you send it off.
...And "bitch"...? Please... this isn't Reddit. Grow up.
Finally, "its" is possessive, while "it's" is the contraction of "it is". Learn the difference.