Jason Kint Profile picture
May 28, 2021 29 tweets 11 min read Read on X
incoming…
google

more unsealed docs, this time in the Google case led by Arizona Attorney General.
The newly unsealed material is underlined in green unsealed this week (left). Last year, Google proactively unsealed less risky material (right) when Judge first ruled. /1 ImageImage
When Association Press broke original report leading to this lawsuit, it triggered an emergency meeting with an *attention-grabbing* meeting name. The yellow here was actually learned last year when Google proactively unsealed bits (likely trying to muffle press cycles). /2 Image
But now we get the fully unsealed evidence which shows a much more important fact - CEO Sundar Pichai was directly involved. In fact, he received “code yellow” updates from an SVP who oversaw the area of concern who started at Google more than twenty years ago an intern. /3 Image
Most damning in newly unsealed evidence (1) Google’s employees admitting there's almost no way NOT to provide your location to Google (2) Google designs its ecosystem for location data collection.
“This doesn’t sound like something we would want on the front page of the NYT.” /4 Image
In fact, the VP of Maps at Google admitted during deposition that the only way to avoid Google inferring your home and work address is to essentially decide your own device by inserting false addresses. 🤦🏼‍♂️/5 Image
“WAA” stands for “Web and App Activity”… apparently you can turn it off and Location History off but then Google Maps does the surveillance for Google (note to all, switch to Apple Maps). Employees didn't seem to get this either. /6 Image
But we also learned in this newly unsealed material that something happens when settings make it easier for users to express their expectations not to have their physical location tracked. /7 Image
How big of a drop-off was it? Check this out from the unsealed discovery. When users turned off location services more and more, it made search less effective on the phone. That's a BIG problem for Google. /8 Image
Google had to go to work to bury the setting and get OEM partners to do the same in order to drive back up what they call the "Location Attach Rate." Again, unsealed parts in green. /9 Image
We don't know who all rolled over for Google. The complaint and employees said they didn’t have much choice as the only way to have Google’s key apps was to use their preferred design of Android. We did learn LG made the change for Google. /10 Image
This is all core to their surveillance economics. Attorney General’s team rightly looked at the resources Google uses to maximize “location attach rates.” You could also frame this as a surveillance beacon considering how Google appears to abuse it. /11 Image
Google’s own employees even comment how Apple is eating its lunch in the US market. No doubt, this only has become more so as Apple rolled out enhanced privacy features on iOS and its browser while Google’s surveillance economics continue to get more and more attention. /12 Image
Google's own employees seem to recognize Google’s need to maximize surveillance economics creates a tension with how users expect their Google-owned browser and operating system should work. This problem is getting worse by the day. /13
We also now see in exhibits that the AP story triggered honest reactions from Google’s own employees. Someone - likely in legal department - begged employees not to comment on the report likely knowing it would ultimately be included in discovery materials. /14 Image
Google employees' disgust and concern is immediately evident.
Even a privacy-focused Google engineer couldn’t protect her/his own location from the company. There is more here that's insane where they use non-google builds to try to not be tracked by their own company. /15 🤦🏼‍♂️ Image
This wasn’t exactly a new problem as it was identified there were five different settings to configure how they mine device usage. /16 Image
Amazing. According to the unsealed complaint, the senior product executive ***at Google*** and ***responsible for location services*** did not know how Google’s own location services interacted with each other. /17 Image
Google had clearly shifted its priorities over the years in how it treats location data. In the 2014-15 range, Google started collecting precise location data and then retreated in early 2019 sometime after the AP reported on their actual practices. Monopoly power. /18 Image
A lot of attention also on what is effectively a loophole that allows a company’s apps to continue to have the users’ location as long as they can get permission through at least one other owned app on the device. Google uses much-less powerful Uber as an example here... /19 Image
however, this loophole becomes a real problem when applied to dominance (Google)…. their own employees recognized their “landmark privacy policy” was created in order to allow them to mine behaviors across their products (and sync their cookie data, too, IIRC)…/20 Image
This is all relevant to emerging legislative fixes for Google and Facebook. Data protection and competition policy are being integrated recognizing how duopoly leverages data across dominant products. See Australia, Germany, UK, EU, state AG suits, FTC, and DOJ lawsuits. /21
Also, it’s a good reminder how Google, similar to Facebook, uses its unparalleled legal and comms teams to suppress scrutiny. As background, @DCNorg filed with @newsalliance (hat tip) to have these docs unsealed nearly a year ago ...and they were just unsealed this week. /22 ImageImageImageImage
I have little doubt that after Judge signaled he would unseal docs, Google proactively tried to unseal the most attention grabbing but least legal risky parts of this lawsuit to muffle press. /23
Somewhere in the evidence (there are a ton of docs) they even acknowledge how Facebook’s Cambridge Analytica mess spiked the press attention in how it was handled.
Hence my thread, this also deserves attention. /24
Here is a thread from last year when we initially filed to tie some of this together. /25
Here is the full set of docs from this week. Start with the refiled complaint at the top. Please reply here if I missed anything of significance or jump into my DMs. It takes a village. 🙏🏼 /26 azag.gov/media/interest…
ok, one more. this is literally a Google employee describing how he uses a fork of android in order to be "G-Free." IOW, please don't use our products at home if you want to avoid surveillance. /27 Image
ok, that's all for now. I recognize it's a Friday of a holiday weekend but that's the way they roll. It took me a few days to get through everything. Image
Credit to @Insider for covering ⬆️ as the docs were shared on the Friday of a holiday weekend. /end businessinsider.com/unredacted-goo…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Jason Kint

Jason Kint Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @jason_kint

Sep 19
Woah. Fun. Buried in DOJ adtech antitrust exhibits posted overnight is a highly sensitive summary of Google's monitoring and spinning of the DOJ's search antitrust complaint in 2020 - yes, the landmark case the US DOJ just won. Keep this in mind as you read my thread. /1 Image
Ingredients: a project code-name -> 'BeeGee,' 'fake privilege' as one of Google's legal eagles has called it only to be scorched by Courts, and a Google blog post (AKA PR spin) dutifully shared by influencers and press which is Google's key goal (Facebook does this, too). /2 Image
At the top of the wins is getting the WSJ Editorial Board to weigh in. Google accomplished this with a "deft" briefing by its chief legal officer, Kent Walker. Google also noting many of its blog spin arguments were used verbatim. Yeaaaay Google PR team. /3 Image
Read 12 tweets
Sep 17
just found some eye-popping stuff in google discovery under the examples of substantive chats (not deleted). you ready? it's between two key VPs (33+yrs collectively working at Google) and strikes at the intersection of privacy and antitrust as they began cookie deprecation. /1
All yellow highlights are mine. I am going to attempt to translate what is going on here based on my knowledge of all context around this chat and having reviewed and studied the company closely over the years. Correct me on anything you think I've got wrong please. /2
We know from prior reports, when Google announced 3rd party cookie deprecation, it also dropped super low quality methodology research (for G) that this would drop publishers' ad revenues by 52%. It appears they hoped this would cause "chrome to do something different." /3 Image
Read 12 tweets
Sep 11
Day 3: USvGoogle. Wow. “Google imposed debt on publishers” in damning evidence. After opening day with evasive top Google exec who ran adtech for both sides of market (but said “I believe so” to header bidding happening and AdX having 20% take rate), fireworks with DOJ expert. /1
Impressive DOJ expert Dr. Ravi systematically walked through conduct that had the interest conflicts lights blinking like fire alarms in Court. First, he testified 53% of Google's wins in auction were due to "First Look" (basically jumping in line to block) in Google's AdX. /2 Image
We saw an email exhibit explaining to leadership that "launching AdX into non-DFP servers destroys G's advantage leading to AdX losing access to overall queries with less valuable inventory begetting lower CPMs causing pubs to decrease G's access to their inventory. WTF. /3
Read 10 tweets
Sep 8
And so it begins. Tomorrow. US vs Google 2 antitrust trial. Google has had at least three off record briefings for press in the last month and just now posted its own propaganda blog post which no reporter should share the raw link without proper context. Just report on it. /1 Image
Google also posted its version of our adtech explainer. DCN focused on today and tomorrow but didn’t directly mention Google (only its conflicts of interest). Google focuses on today vs newspapers and takes credit for the web…as it likes to.

DCN on left, Google on right. /2

Like I said with Search after reading that complaint and knowing the business history, Google is screwed with adtech, too. DOJ and its attorneys did their homework, they know their stuff after years of study and discovery. I’m looking forward to the next four weeks. /3
Read 8 tweets
Aug 27
Motions hearing over. As expected, Google, and its Chief Legal Officer, Kent Walker, had an incredibly bad day as Court heard arguments over its abuse of privilege in the USA v Google adtech pre-trial motion. Scorched (imho) from the bench, “a very big problem for Google” /1
Since it’s no longer a trial, Court noted it wasn’t necessary to rule today but she made crystal clear, quotes as I captured them, “I’m comfortable saying this is not the way a respected corporate entity should function. A clear abuse of privilege.” /2
She said Google’s actions were “absolutely inappropriate and not proper” and said as each witness goes to the stand in trial, “I WILL DRAW INFERENCES.” and “will take into consideration as you call witnesses.” /3
Read 9 tweets
Aug 26
Nearly 300 more exhibits unsealed in last 24hrs for the Google adtech trial 9/9 in EDVA (on top of the 150 Friday). More insane illustrations of Google's market power, here showing how much of the ad spend in the global auctions run by Google comes through Google. Got that? /1 Image
These are all charts taking the wealth of data provided by Google to illustrate how much margin, marker power and conflicts of interest live with Google's services being on all sides of the advertising auctions (including tied to their search monopoly). /2 Image
So we start to see in unsealed emails how Google's market power is (ab)used. Here a top executive cites the 20% margins on auctions *tied* to the unique access to Google's AdWords demand (see monopoly power), and the suggestion of moving fees around to protect the margin. /3 Image
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(