Google Refuses AG’s Request for Documents

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
You know you have too much power when you can routinely "turn down" requests from the office of the Attorney General. Hell, normal people can't get out of simple stuff like jury duty.

So much for Google’s promise to cooperate with the Texas attorney general’s investigation of its business practices. With that pledge now two years in the past and gathering dust, the company is taking a decidedly different approach to Texas AG Greg Abbott’s repeated requests for documents it has allegedly been withholding from his office. Having first requested more time to produce the documents demanded of it, Google is now simply refusing to turn them over.
Click to expand...
 
apparently I've been under a rock, but what is the AG's issue with Google? The article didn't say...
 
So what does Google have to hide that they dont want the world to know?
 
Don't know of many companies that just hand docs over without a subpoena. Otherwise they are leaving themselves open to a fishing expedition or potentially giving away business secrets that could be used to harm their future growth.

/not a fanboy
 
Google is God, They are Open Source and Awesome. They are Do No Evil.

Its obviously Apples Fault.
 
Steve said:
Hell, normal people can't get out of simple stuff like jury duty.
Click to expand...
Why would anyone want to get out of jury duty? Jury duty is the only real benefit of citizenship, you can find someone else guilty of something. Judgement day!

TBH, the only people who want to get out of jury duty are weak minded individuals who don't have the balls to argue their point of view to a group of 11 other people in real life. Forum warrioring is easy but apparently telling someone else that there are wrong in front of a bunch of other people is not.

#fail
 
"If you have something that you don’t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it in the first place..." - Eric Schmidt, Executive Chairman of Google on Privacy through use of their search engine.
 
Thuleman said:
Why would anyone want to get out of jury duty? Jury duty is the only real benefit of citizenship, you can find someone else guilty of something. Judgement day!

TBH, the only people who want to get out of jury duty are weak minded individuals who don't have the balls to argue their point of view to a group of 11 other people in real life. Forum warrioring is easy but apparently telling someone else that there are wrong in front of a bunch of other people is not.

#fail
Click to expand...

My wife is an attourney, so I would never be allowed to sit on any jury. Also since I am aware that a jury can basically choose to ignore all laws and declare a man innocent for little reason, it would be a waste for me to go into the jury selection process.

The reason I personally don't want to go in for jury duty is also because ever since I learned that the people who are the loudest are "right" in society, instead of those that are correct, I have a deep hatred of individual people.

Also, you sound like the last person who should be on a jury, Thuleman. it sounds like you may be nursing a god complex, or at the very least the type of person that would abuse power given to them.
 
Thuleman said:
Why would anyone want to get out of jury duty? Jury duty is the only real benefit of citizenship, you can find someone else guilty of something. Judgement day!

TBH, the only people who want to get out of jury duty are weak minded individuals who don't have the balls to argue their point of view to a group of 11 other people in real life. Forum warrioring is easy but apparently telling someone else that there are wrong in front of a bunch of other people is not.

#fail
Click to expand...

There can be financial considerations of jury duty ... some companies will only provide limited pay for jury duty ... the pay for jury duty itself might not even cover the meals and gas depending on where you are with respect to the court ... if someone has the time and the social duty to serve on a jury then power to them ... if someone only wants to be on a jury to exert their control over someone or the other jury members I am not sure that is the most sympathetic reason ;)
 
Thuleman said:
Why would anyone want to get out of jury duty? Jury duty is the only real benefit of citizenship, you can find someone else guilty of something. Judgement day!

TBH, the only people who want to get out of jury duty are weak minded individuals who don't have the balls to argue their point of view to a group of 11 other people in real life. Forum warrioring is easy but apparently telling someone else that there are wrong in front of a bunch of other people is not.

#fail
Click to expand...
or you know...theres people that could stand to lose or earn significantly less money by wasting their time in jury duty. prime example would be people who day-trade stocks.

last time i was called in for jury duty (luckily i wasn't actually selected to sit on a jury) we definitely were not allowed to use electronic devices in the court room. I'm pretty confident that that's the case in 99.999999999999% of the time in this country.
 
ballistic90 said:
My wife is an attourney, so I would never be allowed to sit on any jury. Also since I am aware that a jury can basically choose to ignore all laws and declare a man innocent for little reason, it would be a waste for me to go into the jury selection process.

The reason I personally don't want to go in for jury duty is also because ever since I learned that the people who are the loudest are "right" in society, instead of those that are correct, I have a deep hatred of individual people.
Click to expand...
The way a jury works is that you have as much of an opportunity to state your opinion as the "loud" guy next to you. I find jury to be intellectually fascinating and challenging. When you have logic on your side then it's not that difficult to explain something in such a way that even people who initially disagree with you have no other choice than to agree with your presentation if they follow the logic to its inevitable conclusion.

As long as you are "right" about whether someone is guilty or not convincing 11 other people (if necessary) is what the system and the challenge is all about.

ballistic90 said:
Also, you sound like the last person who should be on a jury, Thuleman. it sounds like you may be nursing a god complex, or at the very least the type of person that would abuse power given to them.
Click to expand...
Yes, I find everyone guilty, they wouldn't be in court if they weren't guilty of something. :rolleyes:

Honestly, between the two of us I am not the one with issues as I didn't post that "I have a deep hatred of individual people."
 
Thuleman said:
When you have logic on your side then it's not that difficult to explain something in such a way that even people who initially disagree with you have no other choice than to agree with your presentation if they follow the logic to its inevitable conclusion.
Click to expand...

Baahahahaha....if only that were actually true of humans. This forum would be incredibly boring (yet quiet, respectful, and nice) if that were true. :p
 
Thuleman said:
Why would anyone want to get out of jury duty? Jury duty is the only real benefit of citizenship, you can find someone else guilty of something. Judgement day!

TBH, the only people who want to get out of jury duty are weak minded individuals who don't have the balls to argue their point of view to a group of 11 other people in real life. Forum warrioring is easy but apparently telling someone else that there are wrong in front of a bunch of other people is not.

#fail
Click to expand...

I've never had jury duty, and I intend to serve if called upon, but I'm pretty sure I'd be highly aggravated when I'm told to ignore something like video taped evidence of someone being murdered because it is "inadmissible" or some other legal nonsense, and really sour my desire to do it again. The idea of jury duty is to find justice, and in today's legal climate this is ofter overlooked for someone who just wants to win.
 
BoogerBomb said:
So what does Google have to hide that they dont want the world to know?
Click to expand...

Probably setting a precedent whereby every idiot can start demanding information from them because they obliged one legal troll.
 
Thuleman said:
Why would anyone want to get out of jury duty? Jury duty is the only real benefit of citizenship, you can find someone else guilty of something. Judgement day!

TBH, the only people who want to get out of jury duty are weak minded individuals who don't have the balls to argue their point of view to a group of 11 other people in real life. Forum warrioring is easy but apparently telling someone else that there are wrong in front of a bunch of other people is not.

#fail
Click to expand...

Because slavery is immoral.

Not that it matters because they will never let me anywhere near a jury box; the second they see my Fully Informed Jury Association bumper sticker, they send me on the fast track out.

See, juries are just rubberstampers. The judge gets to decide what evidence they can and cannot see (I refuse to find somone guilty without seeing ALL of the evidence and my policy is that any motion in limine is to be construed against the party motioning), they get to "interpret" the law for the jury, the jury is prohibited from doing their own research (even though judges are allowed to do the same in a bench trial) and the judges are permitted to lie to the jury about what is and isn't legal (e.g a judge can say nullification is illegal when in fact it isn't).
 
McFry said:
I've never had jury duty, and I intend to serve if called upon, but I'm pretty sure I'd be highly aggravated when I'm told to ignore something like video taped evidence of someone being murdered because it is "inadmissible" or some other legal nonsense, and really sour my desire to do it again. The idea of jury duty is to find justice, and in today's legal climate this is ofter overlooked for someone who just wants to win.
Click to expand...

I'd have a hard time with that as well. If something is so incriminating that either party is pushing hard to get it flagged as inadmissable, then very clearly it shows something they don't want me to see. Not only are my feelings/interpretations going to be swayed by that, but it's also going to cause me to probably form an opinion of that party, and that opinion is not going to be a favorable one.

Between that, and then the whole "we know you did it but prosecution presented a poor case" mindset, I would make a horrible juror. Example: Casey Anthony.
 
The article is thin on details, of course. If there was no actual subpeona, then Google has the legal right to tell the AG to piss off.
 
Thuleman said:
Why would anyone want to get out of jury duty? Jury duty is the only real benefit of citizenship, you can find someone else guilty of something. Judgement day!
Click to expand...

I don't know either.
It's so easy.........sit around and read magazines for a few hours.....get picked.......find guilty......go home. They even PAY you to do it!
 
Monkey34 said:
I don't know either.
It's so easy.........sit around and read magazines for a few hours.....get picked.......find guilty......go home. They even PAY you to do it!
Click to expand...

yeah I love making 1/4th of my normal wage, risking my job for an extended trial, and having to live out of a suitcase in a crappy motel for 4 weeks.
 
McFry said:
yeah I love making 1/4th of my normal wage, risking my job for an extended trial, and having to live out of a suitcase in a crappy motel for 4 weeks.
Click to expand...

Lemme guess, you don't vote either because it's inconvenient and it doesn't matter anyways?
 
McFry said:
yeah I love making 1/4th of my normal wage, risking my job for an extended trial, and having to live out of a suitcase in a crappy motel for 4 weeks.
Click to expand...

There are workplaces that pay you for going to jury duty, in addition to the normal $15 or whatever you get for going. I work at one of them. My father had jury duty for 3-4 days last year and got paid for the whole thing by his employer.
 
kbrickley said:
There can be financial considerations of jury duty ... some companies will only provide limited pay for jury duty ... the pay for jury duty itself might not even cover the meals and gas depending on where you are with respect to the court ... if someone has the time and the social duty to serve on a jury then power to them ... if someone only wants to be on a jury to exert their control over someone or the other jury members I am not sure that is the most sympathetic reason ;)
Click to expand...

I had jury duty for 2 weeks last summer...it felt like a 2 week vacation, got my full salary from work during the period. I managed to coerce some of the other jurors on the panel to go to the local bar 4 blocks from the courthouse during our lunch hour every day. It was a great experience.
 
damicatz said:
I refuse to find somone guilty without seeing ALL of the evidence
Click to expand...
Inadmissible evidence is often not admitted for a reason. I'm not arguing that it's always a valid one, but sometimes it is.

Imagine the following highly implausible scenario. A business owner wants to prove that her ex-employee was using the computer to buy stuff off eBay on company time. She wants to use this information as justification for the wrongful termination suit which the ex-employee has brought against her. She doesn't have administrative access to the machine. In fact, she can't even get in, since the ex-employee is the only one that has the password! Since she's not the brightest bulb in the box, she goes to the local college helpdesk and hires a kid to break into the machine.

Up until this point, everything you read actually happened. I was the helpdesk kid. I left the original drive alone and made a dd copy of it, which I broke into for her. Now let's mix up the story a bit. The kid she hired was the son of the ex-employee. The business owner didn't know it when she hired the kid. Said kid breaks into the machine, realizes that it belonged to their parent, and deletes any cookies related to eBay or PayPal. He then turns the machine over to the business owner.

The evidence has been tampered with. Should it still be admissible in court? Without knowing the backstory, the evidence would point towards the plaintiff having a solid case.
 
Thuleman said:
TBH, the only people who want to get out of jury duty are weak minded individuals who don't have the balls to argue their point of view to a group of 11 other people in real life.
Click to expand...
Your troll attempt is weaksauce, and I'd think of a witty retort, but that is even more fruitless effort than driving all the way to court to sit around with some of societies scum I otherwise successfully avoid by not shopping at Walmart or using public transportation.
 
TheMadHatterXxX said:
I had jury duty for 2 weeks last summer...it felt like a 2 week vacation, got my full salary from work during the period.
Click to expand...
Only because you were being paid.

My employer will NOT pay anyone a penny if they don't show up. You're not penalized and don't have to use your vacation, but that's the only courtesy they show you.

For most of us, we lose money and get behind in our work causing stress.
 
Thuleman said:
As long as you are "right" about whether someone is guilty or not convincing 11 other people (if necessary) is what the system and the challenge is all about.
Click to expand...

so if you think they are guilty and the 11 other don't,even though you have all seen the same evidence, its your job to convince them?

news flash, your not supposed to be convincing anyone...that's not the purpose of a juror
 
Crosshairs said:
so if you think they are guilty and the 11 other don't,even though you have all seen the same evidence, its your job to convince them?

news flash, your not supposed to be convincing anyone...that's not the purpose of a juror
Click to expand...

Doesn't the decision have to be unanimous? If so, I'd say then there definitely has to be some convincing going on, or at least a discussion of the evidence.
 
MavericK96 said:
Doesn't the decision have to be unanimous? If so, I'd say then there definitely has to be some convincing going on, or at least a discussion of the evidence.
Click to expand...

It depends on the case ......criminal yes it has to be unanimous, civil, no..and I have no problem with discussion, I just dont think its anyone place to convince another juror that they are wrong....even if they are wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top