To better understand Google's Apps
for Education program it is essential to read the agreement that Google
requires schools to execute to obtain the service. Google generally offers this program to
secondary or post-secondary schools for free (there may be maintenance and/or
other costs associated with implementation and/or operation of the service). While the default setting
for the U.S.
Google Apps for Education service is one that does not allow for Google to
serve ads, it is troubling that the agreement
provides schools the ability to data mine their students with the “click of a mouse” in the Admin Console.
Why has Google provided schools the ability to behavioral advertise to students based upon their school emails, attachments, uploaded videos and related digital activity? Does the agreement include the ability to behavioral-advertise so cash strapped schools may negotiate an advertising revenue share with Google in the future when they need an easy-to-implement new income stream?
Why has Google provided schools the ability to behavioral advertise to students based upon their school emails, attachments, uploaded videos and related digital activity? Does the agreement include the ability to behavioral-advertise so cash strapped schools may negotiate an advertising revenue share with Google in the future when they need an easy-to-implement new income stream?
Since Google
provides schools the ability to turn on and off the behavioral advertising
function for its school based services it makes me wonder what Google is doing
behind the scenes with student content. Is
Google’s Apps for Education service a Trojan Horse to data mine and erode our
children’s personal privacy and safety? How is this
service able to so easily go in and out of data mining mode with just a "flip of a switch" by a school administrator? Why isn't Google more transparent regarding its data mining capabilities for the services it offers to schools? Does this indicate that Google believes that students don’t have an expectation of privacy when utilizing its school branded services?
It appears that Google presumes that its Apps For Education users don't have an expectation of privacy. To defend its practices, in its motion to dismiss Fread, Google directly quotes from a
1970's case, Smith v. Maryland, 442
U.S. 735, 743-744 (1979), "a person has no legitimate expectation of
privacy in information he voluntarily turns over to third parties". This case was decided before the widespread
adoption of cell phones, email, the cloud, and other digital technologies.
In U.S. v. Jones,
132 S. Ct. 945 (2012), the most recent major privacy case the
Supreme Court has decided, Justice Sotomayor in referencing Smith's central premise that an
individual has no reasonable expectation of privacy in information voluntarily
disclosed to third parties, stated "[t]his approach is ill suited in the
digital age, in which people reveal a great deal of information about
themselves to third parties in the course of carrying out mundane
tasks." Justice Sotomayor's
statement clearly diminishes the central tenet of Smith and her philosophy has resonated recently with state
lawmakers and courts around the country.
State legislatures and the courts
are moving towards recognizing that one has an expectation of privacy in the
digital age. For example, at least 13 states have enacted legislation in the past 15
months that protects employees and students from generally being required to
provide access to their 3rd party created personal digital accounts. Earlier this year, Texas enacted HB 2268 that requires law enforcement to
obtain a warrant before accessing one's personal email accounts or cloud
content. In addition, a federal district court in Minnesota recently
stated that students have an expectation of privacy regarding their personal
electronic accounts. These news laws and
court rulings demonstrate that our courts and legislatures firmly acknowledge
that we have an expectation of privacy despite third parties storing our
content.
Google's actions speak louder than
its words. In 2010, Google listed its privacy principles and they
included: "Develop products that
reflect strong privacy standards and practices; Make the collection of personal
information transparent; and Give users meaningful choices to protect their
privacy". If Google practiced its privacy principles it would be more transparent about how it processes student data and it would strictly prohibit data mining in its Google Apps For Education Agreements.
Fread raises some important issues about student privacy in the
digital age. It demonstrates the need
for school technology providers to make their users' personal privacy a top
priority. Unfortunately, it appears that absent court guidance and/or
Department of Education rules that ban the data mining of school sanctioned
digital accounts, some cloud providers may continue to put profits ahead of the
need for privacy in an educational setting. Until technology providers
are legally banned from data mining school provided digital accounts, students
and parents/guardians must be informed of the risks associated with utilizing
school provided digital services that may erode personal privacy and put our
children's safety at risk.
Copyright 2013 by the Law Office of
Bradley S. Shear, LLC All rights reserved.
No comments:
Post a Comment