
France's Data Protection agency issues their maximum monetary penalty to Google - hugoroy
http://www.cnil.fr/english/news-and-events/news/article/the-cnils-sanctions-committee-issues-a-150-000-EUR-monetary-penalty-to-google-inc/
======
junto
€150,000 is a drop in Google's ocean.

Better would be to fine any public company a percentage of their market cap or
something comparative that matches the fine to the size of the company.

That would provide a true penalty that discourages large multi-nationals from
abusing local laws.

~~~
greenyoda
In US dollars, roughly $200,000. This action probably cost the French
government more in bureaucrats' salaries than it got from Google.

If the fines are this small, it's pretty clear that the legislators who passed
this law were not interested in creating a serious deterrent.

~~~
atmosx
It's possible that they didn't knew what they were after... Also we should not
underestimate the power of stupidity, in all ranks of society.

~~~
JohnTHaller
They implemented a 'cookie directive' where websites are supposed to ask
permission to set cookies. They not only didn't know what they were after,
they had no idea how to get there or where they were starting.

------
pessimizer
That would be a very harsh penalty for me. I'm not sure if my dry cleaner
would survive a fine like that either, but I'm not sure about their cash
reserves.

------
hugoroy
Just a note: 150,000€ is indeed the maximum penaltly allowed by law for this,
see
[http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexteArticle.do;jsession...](http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexteArticle.do;jsessionid=6BC8BF44AE3B0026A0D3466947518B0C.tpdjo05v_3?idArticle=LEGIARTI000023784589&cidTexte=LEGITEXT000006068624&dateTexte=20140108)

------
nl
Google's right to fight these charges. Things like the EU cookie directive are
stupid laws that allow legislators to pretend to be doing something but do
nothing beyond making websites less user friendly.

~~~
twelvechairs
Which of the four requirements listed do you object to?

~~~
patrickaljord
All of them. This is outrageous. Nobody is forced to use Google and their
privacy policy is Google to decide and their users to accept or not, no
government intervention is needed. The only party that should be fined is the
French government for spying on its citizens without their consent and with
total disregard for the citizen privacy rights using the French version of the
prism program.

~~~
hugoroy
says the guys who surely have read all the privacy policies he supposedly
agreed to… right?

~~~
patrickaljord
So what? I chose to agree with the policy. The state doesn't have any right to
get into my decision to agree willingly to a legal contract with another
private party. This is just legal State racket at work, and hypocritical on
top of that when the government is the only one here spying on me without my
content. Screw them. This despicable government that doesn't create anything
but debt and harasses people who are actually trying to work and racket
innovators who actually create value instead of debt. Maybe if Google went
bankrupt, they'd get some money from the state, but Google being innovating
and profitable? This is unacceptable for the State and it just has to racket
them and punish them for being successful. I'm disgusted by my government who
by the way tonight just voted for a law that forces amazon to charge more for
its books so retail can compete. Yeah, really, screw them. I don't need their
"protection", I just want the State to let us be.

~~~
gress
The state has exactly the right to regulate contracts. We don't actually live
in the libertarian dream you are pretending we do. Many people like to live in
a democracy where money is not the only form of power, but where _votes_ are
powerful too.

~~~
patrickaljord
> We don't actually live in the libertarian dream you are pretending we do.

What? Our constitution already protects our rights to freely sign legal
contracts between each others. Since when is that a libertarian thing? TIL.

> Many people like to live in a democracy where money is not the only form of
> power, but where votes are powerful too.

Who's talking about money? People are already free to accept or not their
contract with Google. What you want is allow people to vote for other people
to be forbidden to sign a contract of _their_ choice with Google, you want
people to vote to restrain other's freedom. That's the opposite of freedom and
what our constitution is about.

~~~
gress
Which country's constitution are you referring to? In any case, the government
clearly has the right to regulate what contracts can be legally entered into.

------
weddpros
How much damage was caused by Google? What amount($) of damage? Did citizens
complain in court? Who was hurt? Is this punishment "just in case" Google
becomes Evil? In contrast, governments have a proven track record in this
domain, and the french gov just passed new laws _against_ online privacy that
even the NSA wouldn't dare dream of. Guess what? People talk about Google, not
about these laws.

~~~
M2Ys4U
You generally don't sue to protect these rights, you complain to the data
protection authority.

~~~
weddpros
Google is no evil. They don't misuse data. But they got fined.

Spammers all around the world are evil. They misuse data. The CNIL should
fight them. Governments are evil. They collect and misuse data. The CNIL
should protect us.

But the CNIL doesn't. It just wastes public money. They go after Google
because it's so easy. The government needs a get-rich-fast scheme: CNIL sues
Google.

They're not here to make things better or protect us. They just "do their job"
but they do it in the most stupid way.

------
eximius
Frankly, I'm not sure why Google puts up with France's shit anyway. I would
have thrown my hands up with that news snippet thing and simply stopped using
the news snippets or listing those news sites in France. After those sites saw
a massive drop in traffic, I'm sure they'd leave Google alone. For a little
while, at least.

------
Nanzikambe
Fixed fines are silly, make it a percentage of revenue or profit. Give them a
real incentive to change.

This sort of thing is done with speeding fines in several countries (link:
[http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/295905?tp=1](http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/295905?tp=1))

~~~
ronaldx
>Fixed fines are silly, make it a percentage of revenue or profit. Give them a
real incentive to change.

What do you think Google's claimed revenue/profit in France would be, in that
case?

------
lispm
EU: next time when you make a law, allow a penalty of 150,000,000 Euro for
starters. After repeated violations increase to 1,500,000,000 . Double each
year. Then Google will listen.

------
eonil
Oh I don't know how it is a _penalty_.

~~~
VladRussian2
it doesn't even come to close to the "cost of business".

------
coldcode
Let them search cake is likely the response.

------
outside1234
holy cow, that's not even 3 people's salary. who thinks that's going to be
effective?

