Does Google Buzz Violate COPPA?

Google Buzz logoDanielle Citron over at Concurring Opinions invited me to write a guest post expanding on a comment I wrote yesterday on her post on the Google Buzz story. I’m reposting it here with more of the links enabled, which got lost in translation:

Google’s new social networking service, Google Buzz, has obviously been all over the news lately, in part for various complaints about Google’s privacy practices. Those complaints have focused on the way in which Buzz, enrollment in which was automatic for Gmail users, initially defaulted to effectively sharing users’ email contacts with the public. EPIC has filed a complaint with the FTC arguing that this combination of automatic enrollment and “opt-out” of information-sharing was an unfair or deceptive trade practice in violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act.

But that’s not what caught my attention in Danielle’s post. What really set off alarm bells in my head was Danielle’s recounting how her children and their friends, all under the age of 13, suddenly had their Gmail accounts turned into Google Buzz accounts, and then proceeded to upload all sorts of information about themselves using the service. That raises the prospect that Google Buzz, by collecting such information without getting the appropriate parental consent, violated the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, or COPPA. I haven’t seen any discussion of this issue anywhere else.

COPPA is one of the few privacy statutes with real bite: it has strict rules that require substantial effort to follow, and the FTC has shown itself to be a vigorous enforcer. Indeed, the FTC has gone after two social networking sites for COPPA violations recently, and in one case imposed a fine of $1 million. So is Google violating COPPA? The answer is unclear but there’s definitely risk for Google here.

Continue ReadingDoes Google Buzz Violate COPPA?

Imagine this…

Snapshot_002You wake up in the morning and look out your window at the snow. You go to your inventory and pick out a nice outfit and shoes. Then go into appearance and, after wearing your clothes and shoes, you quickly take off all your hair; you need to look sophisticated today. You attach a new ‘do. On second thought…

A quick skin change and some low key accessories later, you teleport out. A few seconds pass, and you find yourself among a group of people in shorts & skirts under the bright sun of Tropical Eden. You realize that the organizers of the contest you came to enter preferred tropical dress, so you popo open your inventory and change outfits, shorten your hair and put on different shoes.

Now that you are ready, you walk to the line that has formed. As you do, you notice the chat around you. “No furries allowed in the contest.” A well dressed wolf curses and disappears and a few tails come off. “Please no biting during the contest.” A lady behind you whispers to a friend, “That is what garlic is for.”

Continue ReadingImagine this…

Seventh Circuit Clarifies Application of Fourth Amendment to Searches of Computer Hard Drives

seventh-circuit51While working as a life guard instructor, Matthew Mann covertly installed a video camera in a locker room in order to take footage of women changing their clothes.  After the camera was discovered and turned over to the authorities, police executed a search warrant at Mann’s home for “video tapes, CD’s or other digital media, computers, and the contents of said computers, tapes, or other electronic media, to search for images of women in locker rooms or other private areas.”  In connection with the search, police seized computers and an external hard drive from Mann.  Police later ran forensic software on this equipment that revealed the presence of child pornography, which formed the basis of a federal prosecution.

The district court denied Mann’s motion to suppress the images found on his hard drives.  Mann then pled guilty, but preserved the right to litigate his Fourth Amendment claim on appeal.  In United States v. Mann (No. 08-3041) (Rovner, J.), the Seventh Circuit affirmed.  Although the scope of the warrant was limited by its terms to a search for “images of women in locker rooms or other private areas,” the court held that police did not exceed the scope of the warrant when they collected and viewed Mann’s collection of child pornography. 

Continue ReadingSeventh Circuit Clarifies Application of Fourth Amendment to Searches of Computer Hard Drives