Hacker News Reader

Comment by mschuster91 | Hacker News Reader

An outside party (e.g. a customer of an ISP) sending an e-mail to a company which uses Google Apps Mail or a forward to a GMail account because the ISP email interface sucks may not know at all that Google is involved.

So, the third party has no chance to be aware of Google's ToS...

View on HN

So that means that no third-party services should be allowed?

When I send an email to a company that uses third-party customer support software to consume, parse, and host the email; I don't agree to the TOS of the customer support vendor.

When I send an email to a company that uses third-party software to parse and archive email for legal purposes; I don't agree to the TOS of that email parsing and archiving company.

It would be ridiculous and impossible to expect that I would agree to the TOS of each and all pieces of software used in the processing of my communications with a company.

Those vendors aren't using the content of your email to further their own interests other than the expected function of delivering the mail reliably.

> Those vendors aren't using the content of your email to further their own interests other than the expected function of delivering the mail reliably.

And? The intent is irrelevant

You say this, but it's not actually true in law.

I don't see anything about intent or reason for the "intercept" making a difference in the law http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2511

> You say this, but it's not actually true in law

Can you post a link to those laws

The person they're sending it to could also publish it on the front page of the New York Times.

This issue is about what the receiver wants to do with the email, so by using gmail, or forwarding to gmail, the receiver is opting to have all his or her mails scanned by Google for ad placement.

It is, as a sender, my responsibility to not send information to people I can't trust. So if I think the recipient may post a picture of my wiener on the NYT front page, I should not do this.

However, if I do not know that the recipient uses Google Mail, it is not okay that Google scans and potentially indexes my wiener...

I see no fundamental difference.

recipient had forwarded email to google, by setting their MX record to google's server.

Where is it alleged that Google is doing that?

Did you find a picture of your wiener on Google Images? What search terms did you use? Or did you take a quick snap and drop it on the camera icon in the Google Image Search box?

I've not done the wiener experiment, but I do know that Google's ad placement algorithms are fairly simple-minded. For instance, our CFO sent me a request for a dump of some accounts off the accounting server. What ads did I see? Dumpster rentals and local trash haulers!

Isn't the sender then also potentially a target for ad re targeting even though they were never on gmail at all?

Assuming the sender is not also on Gmail, how does Gmail manage to show her ads?

You have the sender's email. Combine your information with information via other sources such as any other website.

http://www.adroll.com/retargeting

Even if a third party sending an e-mail to a Gmail address is aware of Google's ToS, it's farfetched to think that they're somehow bound by Google's ToS, which they never agreed to. Yet Google claimed that these senders did, somehow consent:

Koh also rejected Google's contention that non-Gmail users gave their implied consent to scanning of their communications.

"Google has cited no case that stands for the proposition that users who send emails impliedly consent to interceptions and use of their communications by third parties other than the intended recipient of the email," Koh wrote.

In general, you just have to trust your email correspondents not to show your mail to parties that should not see it.

If, for you, such parties include Google's servers, then don't send mail to Gmail users. And make sure your non-Gmail correspondents do likewise.

The problem is that most correspondents don't know what their email is being reviewed by Google.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com