2 posts • joined 17 May 2009
How is this Google's fault?
It's bizarre that the author is trying to blame Google for this. It's the EU's fault.
You can bet that if Google could get away with waiting for a court order every time, they would. That would mean less work for them, since the legal system would make the judgement calls, not Google (Google wouldn't need to pay an army of paralegals)
The European Union wanted Google to set up this system. When they did, the EU specifically praised them (http://ec.europa.eu/justice/newsroom/data-protection/news/140602_en.htm), stating, "It is a good development that Google has announced that it will finally take the necessary measures to respect European law."
The court decision is the screw-up here. Google may not be implementing it perfectly, but the EU is the one who made the two biggest mistakes:
* Having this bogus "right" at all (I don't care if you think my freedom of speech is "irrelevant")
* Expecting private companies to enforce it
SFU and the GPL
"Windows Services for Unix has been a product of Microsoft's for years. It is under the GPL and my understanding is that Microsoft has complied with the terms of that license.
Not that I am aware of."
Actually, Services for Unix does indeed include GPL software (in addition to BSD). See http://www.linux.com/archive/feature/30073 for details. This is far from the first product to include FOSS code.