Category Archives: Public Policy Blog

Google’s views on government, policy and politics

Taking Stock of Improvements to Transparency Around National Security Demands

Posted by Richard Salgado, Legal Director, Law Enforcement and Information Security and David Lieber, Senior Privacy Policy Counsel

Today, we're updating our Transparency Report concerning government demands for user information to include data from the first half of 2015. In the US, we have seen a 20% increase in requests in criminal investigations and a 49% increase in the number of individual accounts specified in those requests since the last reporting period. Compared to the same period last year, we saw a 4% decrease in requests, but a 45% increase in the number of individual accounts specified.

The release of our Transparency Report today is an opportunity to take stock of the hard-fought battle to provide more transparency into the national security demands that Google and other companies receive. There's still plenty of work to be done, but we've taken some significant steps forward.

In March of 2013, after about a year of discussion with the US government, Google began publishing statistics about receipt of National Security Letters (NSLs). This was the first time any company had reported on that sort of legal process.

Later that year, in an effort the expand the right to report on other types of national security demands, Google filed a lawsuit before the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court asserting a First Amendment right to publish aggregate information about national security demands that we receive. At the time, Google could not even acknowledge receipt of any FISA demands, which meant we could not provide any transparency around the volume and scope of national security demands we receive.

As a result of the litigation, in 2014, Google and other companies earned the right to report the volume of national security demands in ranges of 1,000 (e.g. 0-999). The large ranges, however, limited public visibility into the scope of government surveillance, with no appreciable benefit to national security.

Earlier this year, Congress passed the USA Freedom Act, which cut the range in half and provides for other reporting options. Google and other companies in the Reform Government Surveillance coalition fought for the inclusion of these transparency provisions, which provide greater insight into the national security demands that we receive. As a result, starting today our Transparency Report provides more granularity about the national security demands that we receive going back to our first reporting period in 2009. We now make these disclosures in ranges of 500 (e.g. 0-499) instead of ranges of 1,000.

The USA Freedom Act also increases transparency around the issuance of NSLs and use of non-disclosure clauses. In the past, gag restrictions in NSLs could be indefinite, effectively preventing recipients from ever speaking about the existence of the NSLs or their contents and depriving the public of valuable information that can inform the broader policy debate about how to reform relevant legal authorities. Google has challenged the constitutionality of NSLs and non-disclosure obligations for precisely those reasons.

Under the USA Freedom Act, the Department of Justice is now required to regularly review past disclosure restrictions in NSLs and lift those that are no longer needed. Recently, the Department of Justice announced new procedures to implement this requirement, which should ensure that recipients of NSLs are not indefinitely gagged from notifying users and otherwise speaking about their experiences.

The current framework under the USA Freedom Act is far from perfect. As we underscored in testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, we continue to believe there are important First Amendment and transparency equities in making more granular disclosures. There should be little doubt that companies can make such disclosures without compromising national security. Indeed, transparency is necessary to bring legitimacy to laws that otherwise operate concealed from the public. As we take stock of the progress made toward providing greater transparency, we should also recognize that further reforms are necessary to promote better oversight over, and insight into, the implementation of government surveillance laws.

Search on: 2015 in Google Search

From devastation to empowerment and tragedy to hope, our 15th annual Year in Search uncovers the moments that captured the world’s hearts—and questions that revealed who we are. From “How can I help Nepal” to “How can the world find peace?” here’s a look back at 2015, through the lens of Google search.

Google Year in Search 2015

Google - Year in Search 2015

Searching for ways to help

Within two minutes of the deadly attack on Paris in November, the French capital was searching for information on the assault underway in their city. Less than 10 minutes later, the rest of the world started searching. As of today, we’ve seen more than 897 million searches about the city as the world came together to “Pray for Paris.”

Global showings of support and offerings of help were a key topic in search this year. Following the Nepal earthquake, “how can I help Nepal?” was a top global search. From Somerville, Mass. to Ludwigsberg, Germany, people asked how to volunteer and what to donate.

Searching for perspective

While questions around Nepal were similar around the world, the migrant crisis in Europe spiked a wider variety of queries. From Italy asking “How to adopt a Syrian orphan child?” to Germany wondering “Where are the refugees coming from?” the world turned to Google to understand the situation and what it meant for them.

In the U.S., the topic of guns brought varying questions. From Portland, Ore. to Austin, Texas, people across the country searched for “what is gun control,” “why do we need gun control,” “why won’t gun control work” and more to understand the issue. With more than 160 million searches, interest in gun control spiked higher than interest for gun shops—typically a more popular search—at multiple points in 2015.

Searching for acceptance

In June, we met Caitlyn Jenner, someone we’d both always known and were meeting for the first time. Across the globe, she was searched more than 344 million times, and her story helped give a new voice to the transgender community.

People cheered “#lovewins” when the U.S. Supreme Court made a monumental ruling that gay marriages should be recognized at both the State and Federal level. The reaction was instant, with search interest in both same-sex marriage and the Supreme Court reaching higher than at any time in Google's history.

Searching for… the dress, the Force and the singer

Turning to the Search watercooler, the year began with the world divided over an important question: is it white and gold? or blue and black? Days of debate and 73 million searches later, “black and blue dress” topped searches of “white and gold dress,” and the matter was settled forever (right?).

And though “Star Wars: The Force Awakens” is just hitting theaters this week, it’s already taken the Internet by storm(trooper). The trailer alone garnered more than 155 million searches! But the all-time high for Google searches around “Star Wars” was in 2005 after “The Revenge of the Sith” came out in theaters—can we beat it this week?

Finally, what better way to close out the year than by saying “Hello”? With the debut of “25,” Adele broke records by the week, putting her album at the top of the charts and skyrocketing to the top of Google Search faster than any other musician this year.

Hundreds of stories in depth

The 2015 Year in Search goes deeper than we've ever gone before. This year, we’re covering hundreds of news stories, sharing interactive guides and charts, and diving into the numbers by sharing things like how many times people searched for Adele (439 million, if you want to know!).

Go to Google.com/2015 to explore the rest of the 2015 Year in Search stories and top trending charts from around the world.

A Step Toward Protecting Fair Use on YouTube

Posted by Fred von Lohmann, Copyright Legal Director

More than 400 hours of video are uploaded to YouTube every minute. Some of those uploads make use of existing content, like music or TV clips, in new and transformative ways that have social value beyond the original (such as a parody or critique). In the U.S. this activity is often protected by fair use, a crucial exception to copyright law which can help discussion and creativity across different mediums to continue flourishing.

YouTube will now protect some of the best examples of fair use on YouTube by agreeing to defend them in court if necessary.

We are offering legal support to a handful of videos that we believe represent clear fair uses which have been subject to DMCA takedowns. With approval of the video creators, we’ll keep the videos live on YouTube in the U.S., feature them in the YouTube Copyright Center as strong examples of fair use, and cover the cost of any copyright lawsuits brought against them.

We’re doing this because we recognize that creators can be intimidated by the DMCA’s counter notification process, and the potential for litigation that comes with it (for more background on the DMCA and copyright law see check out this Copyright Basics video). In addition to protecting the individual creator, this program could, over time, create a “demo reel” that will help the YouTube community and copyright owners alike better understand what fair use looks like online and develop best practices as a community.

While we can’t offer legal protection to every video creator—or even every video that has a strong fair use defense—we’ll continue to resist legally unsupported DMCA takedowns as part of our normal processes. We believe even the small number of videos we are able to protect will make a positive impact on the entire YouTube ecosystem, ensuring YouTube remains a place where creativity and expression can be rewarded.

Dig Once, Gain Broadband Later

Posted by Staci Pies, Public Policy and Government Relations Counsel

Here’s a simple, bipartisan idea for spreading broadband to more places.

When broadband providers construct a network, they need to string wires along utility poles or bury them underground in protective tubing called conduit. And providers want to minimize the disruption to residents caused by these big builds. “Dig once” policies mandate the installation of an oversized conduit bank by any new network builder within the right-of-way, to accommodate future users when new roads are being built or opened for maintenance and conduit is not already in place.

The expense and complexity of digging up streets to install new networks may increase the cost and slow the pace of broadband network investment and deployment. In the context of the U.S. federal highway system, the U.S. GAO points out that “dig once” policies can save up to 25–33% in construction costs in urban areas and roughly 16% in rural areas. Not only is this an attractive option to providers who save the time and expense of digging, but it has the added benefit of reducing future disruption for local citizens (who probably don’t want to deal with a future road closure if it can be avoided). 

Last week, Reps. Anna Eshoo (D-CA) and Chairman Greg Walden (R-OR) introduced the Broadband Conduit Deployment Act of 2015. This follows the introduction of the Streamlining and Investing in Broadband Infrastructure Act in the Senate by Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Steve Daines (R-MT), and Cory Gardner (R-CO). The bills both focus on the adoption of “dig once” policies for federal highway projects. The goal of the bills is important -- to reduce barriers to broadband deployment and further infrastructure investment, including in rural areas of the country.

Deploying a large-scale broadband network from scratch is hard. It requires considerable planning, negotiations with municipal officials, property owners, incumbent network and utility providers, contract reviews, etc. And all that has to happen before a network builder can put a shovel in the ground or string a wire.

From the White House to the state house and throughout communities across America, policymakers are increasingly focused on what it takes to deploy high-speed broadband networks. “Dig once” is one great way of doing that.

Furthering Broadband Abundance in America

Posted by George Ivanov, Senior Analyst, Public Policy and Government Relations

When we broke ground on Google Fiber in our first group of cities, we ran shovel-first into the old saying that “you never know what you’ll find until you start digging.” Literally, because geological data hasn’t been fully collected in most communities. In early 2014, we created the Google Fiber City Checklist to help cities address this problem by cataloging key data assets ahead of any buildout. While our checklist has helped cities become more fiber-friendly, it doesn’t cover the countless impediments that might be encountered when laying down fiber.

On Monday, the White House released a report drafted by the twenty-five agencies of the Broadband Opportunity Council, outlining specific actions, incentives, and regulatory processes that the federal government can undertake to accelerate broadband deployment and adoption in the United States.

The White House report focuses on four particular areas that are of vital importance and were reflected in the hundreds of comments that the Department of Commerce received back in June:

1. Modernizing federal programs to expand program support for broadband investments. (e.g. expanding USDA and HUD grant programs to include broadband).

2. Empowering communities with tools and resources to attract broadband investment and promote meaningful use. (e.g. the provision of BroadbandUSA best practices, guides, and technical support to cities).

3. Promoting increased broadband deployment and competition through expanded access to Federal assets. (e.g. the DOT creation of a broadband rights-of-way policy for broadband on federal highways, agency-level implementations of “Dig Once” policies, etc.).

4. Improving data collection, analysis and research on broadband. (e.g creating an online data inventory of federal broadband assets).

As we wrote back in June, “The U.S. shouldn’t settle for less than ubiquitous, abundant broadband access” and there is still more work to be done for the U.S. government to successfully implement policies that can make the U.S. fiber ready, wireless ready, and consumer ready.

We see firsthand how the power of abundant broadband access can empower and uplift local communities, and we know people all around the country want to see their government work on what matters to them, modernizing infrastructure and expanding their opportunities. It’s great to know that 25 federal agencies as diverse as the Department of Agriculture, Small Business Administration, and the Institute of Museum and Library Services, will now do more to prioritize broadband abundance. 

The Broadband Opportunity Council report, its objectives, and timelines are an excellent starting point toward action that will focus that leadership and move forward on enabling broadband for all Americans in the months and years ahead.

The Time for Reform is Now

Posted by Richard Salgado, Director for Law Enforcement and Information Security 

As the debate over electronic communications privacy escalates in Congress and around the country, I testified this week before the Senate Judiciary Committee to discuss this very issue. The hearing provided an important opportunity to address users’ very reasonable expectations of privacy when it comes to the content in their email and other online accounts. 

Google strongly supports legislation to update the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), which was signed into law almost thirty years ago -- long before email accounts and the Web were part of our daily lives.  As it is currently written, ECPA allows government agencies to compel a provider to disclose the content of communications, like email and photos, without a warrant in some circumstances. This pre-digital era law no longer makes sense: users expect, as they should, that the documents they store online have the same Fourth Amendment protections as they do when the government wants to enter the home to seize documents stored in a desk drawer. 

There is no compelling policy or legal rationale for there to be different rules. Indeed, the law as currently written is unconstitutional, as the Sixth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals held back in 2010 in United States v. Warshak.  Google requires that law enforcement secure a warrant to compel Google to disclose content. 

In spite of the tremendous support for the legislation voiced across the political spectrum, some agencies that investigate civil infractions, as opposed to violations of criminal law, have sought to delay fixing the infirmities, and have even asked Congress for new and expanded powers. They seek the authority to force providers to search for and disclose users’ emails, documents and other content, rather than getting the information directly from users as they currently do. Congress should reject these efforts to expand the authority of these agencies, and should remain focused on fixing this broken statute. 

It is undeniable that ECPA no longer reflects users’ reasonable expectations of privacy and no longer comports with the Constitution. The Senate legislation, the ECPA Amendments Act of 2015, and its companion in the House, the Email Privacy Act, will ensure electronic communications content is treated in a manner commensurate with other papers and effects that are protected by the Fourth Amendment. 

The time for reform is now.

Positive Momentum for the Judicial Redress Act

Posted by David Lieber, Senior Privacy Policy Counsel

US privacy and security laws make distinctions among US persons and non-US persons that are becoming obsolete in a world where communications primarily take place over a global medium: the Internet.

The Privacy Act of 1974 is one of those laws. It is an important law that creates rights - including judicial redress - against privacy harms that may arise from the US government’s collection and use of personal information. The Privacy Act, however, does not apply to non-US persons.

Last November, Google endorsed legislation that would extend the Privacy Act to non-US persons. Since then, Congressmen Sensenbrenner and Conyers have introduced legislation - the Judicial Redress Act - that would create a process to extend the Privacy Act to non-US persons. Senators Hatch and Murphy have introduced a companion bill in the Senate.

The Judicial Redress Act is an important first step toward establishing a framework whereby users have comparable privacy protections regardless of their citizenship.

Earlier today, the House Judiciary Committee unanimously passed this bill, which enjoys support from a broad array of Internet companies and trade associations. We commend the Judiciary Committee’s action today, and we encourage the House leadership to move swiftly to pass this important bill.

Protecting people from illegal robocalls

Posted by Brad Wetherall, Google My Business Operations Manager 

You’re eating dinner with your family when the phone rings, and you see a phone number that you don’t recognize. You answer and hear a recording: “It’s extremely urgent that we speak to the business owner! We’ve tried to reach you numerous times. Our records indicate that your Google Business Listing has not been claimed...”

This is a common type of robocall, or automated phone call that delivers a pre-recorded message to sell or market services. Some, like informational notices from a doctor’s office, airline or pharmacy, can be useful and are allowed by law. Many others, however, are both useless and illegal in the United States. As the FTC explains: “if the recording is a sales message and you haven't given your written permission to get calls from the company on the other end, the call is illegal.”

Robocallers have targeted Google users for many years. Callers commonly bombard recipients—usually small business owners or individuals—with misleading offers and promotions for improving Google Search and AdWords rankings, or to improve their Google My Business profile. Since the beginning of 2015, we’ve received hundreds of complaints from users about robocalls they’ve received from businesses claiming to be affiliated with Google.

These illegal calls are a huge nuisance, cause small businesses and Google users to unnecessarily worry, and can lead to rip-offs. Illegal robocalls never have, and never will, come from Google.

Unfortunately, this is part of a much larger issue that extends beyond just Google users and customers. The FCC received 215,000 complaints about robocalls in 2014, the FTC gets approximately 150,000 complaints about them every month and says it has brought more than 100 lawsuits against more than 600 companies and individuals responsible for billions of illegal robocalls, to date. Robocallers impersonate many different companies, and have even impersonated the local police, the IRS, and the FTC itself.

If you receive illegal robocalls, here are a few things you can do right now to protect yourself:

  • Report callers to Google, and also the FTC or the FCC. 
  • Hang up the phone. Do not press any key, even if the voice recording prompts you to in order to speak with a live person or to be taken off the call list. 
  • Contact your phone company to see if they can block calls from any numbers. 
  • Register your personal number with the National Do Not Call Registry at: https://www.donotcall.gov/register/reg.aspx or call 1-888-382-1222. 

It’s difficult for Google to take action against callers because they often use untraceable phone numbers, fake company names, and massive global networks of intermediaries. However, today we’re filing an action in California against one search engine optimization company for making these robocalls and confusing our users. It’s unfortunate when a problem must be addressed in a court of law, but we believe this course of action will protect our users and discourage this practice more broadly.

Running a small business is hard work under the best of circumstances. Dealing with illegal robocallers isn’t just a waste of time, it can result in wasted resources and significant damage to your business. We hope these tips, and shining a light on the issue, will help discourage and eventually eliminate this practice.

Creating Value For Consumers From Unused TV Channels

Posted by Staci Pies, Public Policy and Government Relations Counsel

Modern wireless devices, from smartphones to tablets to wearable technologies, often rely on access to both a licensed cellular connection and unlicensed Wi-Fi for access to the Internet. Indeed, this access to both licensed and unlicensed airwaves has powered the mobile revolution to date.

That’s why we’re happy that as the FCC moves forward with its plan to auction more airwaves for licensed mobile use in the 600 MHz band, it has also made progress toward the goal of making three channels in this band available nationwide for unlicensed use. Once the FCC completes its work--including ensuring access to adequate spectrum in areas where a broadcaster may be placed in the “duplex gap” between wireless uplink and downlink, and fully implementing shared access to Channel 37, which is not used for television--these rules will ensure that unlicensed white spaces devices have opportunities to operate as spectrum is recovered from broadcasters and repurposed for wireless broadband.

By adopting a balanced approach to spectrum use that includes both licensed and unlicensed spectrum, the FCC helps ensure that consumers can get online, communicate, connect their devices, and have a quality experience on devices they choose, no matter where they are. Access to this new, low-frequency unlicensed spectrum means far better wide-area Wi-Fi connectivity for streaming a movie to any TV in your home, changing your thermostat settings no matter where you are, transferring photos from your camera to your computer, or answering your door from anywhere using your smartphone.

People rely more and more on Wi-Fi every day to live a connected life. In 2013 Wi-Fi, today’s most commonly used unlicensed technology, contributed over $6.7 billion to the U.S. GDP. The FCC’s order, released this week, recognizes the value to the economy of investments in unlicensed as well as licensed technologies.

How policymakers can support broadband abundance

Posted by Staci Pies, Public Policy and Government Relations Counsel

Nearly three years ago, Nick Budidharma, an 18­ year­ old game developer, drove with his parents from Hilton Head, S.C., to live in a “hacker home” that’s connected to the Google Fiber network. Synthia Payne relocated from Denver to launch a startup that aims to let musicians play together in real­-time online. Kansas City -- America’s first Google Fiber city -- has been transformed.

Today, Google Fiber continues to make the Internet faster and more accessible to more people across the country. Michael Slinger, Director of Google Fiber Cities, will testify today before the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Communications and Technology to urge policymakers to play a more active role in expanding nationwide broadband abundance.

Today’s hearing will highlight the expansion of broadband deployment, recent infrastructure developments, and policies that will encourage investment in broadband expansion. Michael will share our experience building out Google Fiber to present ideas for how policymakers can support greater broadband abundance:

“Policymakers’ top broadband goal should be achieving broadband abundance — which requires reducing the cost of network buildout and removing barriers that limit providers’ ability to reach consumers. The key is to focus on competition, investment, and adoption.”

When lawmakers successfully support broadband infrastructure and development, Americans will have more choices at higher speeds, small businesses will have the opportunity to expand, and local economies will grow. Post content