As a simple citizen of Google sued
Not one Yandex to sue Google! The judicial act of the Moscow City Court, which defended the right of the ordinary citizen to the secrecy of correspondence, telephone conversations, postal, telegraph and other things, guaranteed by article 23 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, is an indicative and even a precedent example for Russian justice. Why is this court so remarkable? Now tell.
ATTENTION! Next, we describe the essence of a specific litigation. In the text can be found dry legal terms. We advise you to remove children, women and other people with vulnerable psyche from the screens.
The Yekaterinburg lawyer Anton Leonidovich Burkov , who drew attention to the fact that Google offers in the form of contextual advertising to acquire a mobile phone, go on holiday or visit a restaurant, initiated the sensational case. It would seem that the usual situation.
')
“But how does the search engine choose an advertising offer to direct to a specific user?” Anton Leonidovich probably asked himself then. Not everyone even thinks about it, because it’s so familiar, so obvious and so easily explained from a marketing point of view. But what conclusion did the lawyer: Google through AdWords analyzes even the correspondence of users and on its basis selects the advertising product. The AdWords information system provides the ability to advertise on websites and in mail to Google International LLC, the owner of the search engine and mail service of the same name.
If we speak absolutely dry legal language, then it works on the territory of Russia like this:
It turns out that Google, albeit in an automated way, but still “reads” the correspondence! This is not a discovery for anyone, and no one expected someone to go to court because of this.
It should be noted that Google is not the only one so beautiful: Yandex, Mail and other search engines using their services also do this, just not a single Yekaterinburg lawyer has reached them yet.
Referring to the secret of correspondence guaranteed to every Russian citizen, Anton Leonidovich appealed to the court where he lost the case in the first instance. The court pointed out that the claimant did not provide the court with any evidence confirming that it was Google LLC that was responsible for ensuring the work of the Gmail mail service and was looking at his personal correspondence.
But justice prevailed! The second instance overturned the above decision. The panel of judges was more attentive to the study of documents on the case and came to the opposite conclusion, concluding that Google still acts contrary to the Constitution of Mother Our Great Russia and violates the rights of its citizens.
The court supported this conclusion with the following data:
Moreover, Google does not even hide the fact that it reads correspondence: according to the product’s privacy policy, posted on the official website of the search engine in the “How we use the collected data” section, it’s stated:
The court of second instance concluded that
At the same time, the court indicated that the argument of Google LLC that it does not affect the criteria for displaying advertisements, since the AdWords settings are determined by the parent company in America, is untenable, because the defendant must bear the risks on his own, knowing that the software he uses violates Russian constitutional rights citizens.
Based on the foregoing, the judicial authority of the second instance concluded that, by placing advertisements in Anton Leonidovich’s messages, Googol was guided by the results of monitoring his correspondence and thus violating the secrecy of his correspondence. No evidence to the contrary was submitted to the court.
In addition, Anton Leonidovich demanded the recovery of moral damage caused by Google. I had every right to do this:
Assessing the level of feelings suffered by the claimant, the court charged 50,000 rubles in his favor.
"Cats tears!" - you say? But given the fact that the decision in this case has received the broadest response, the claims can be showered on Google as a cornucopia, however, as well as on other mail services. Following the successful example of the Yekaterinburg lawyer, many e-mail users will also want to stop spamming and reading the correspondence. If you have the mood and you can sue, shemka will always be at hand.
So it goes. And you are surprised that the state wants to take contextual advertising under control. The “big brother” follows, and our Fatherland cares about the safety of its citizens day and night. And not what you thought everything there and wrote in their social networks.
ATTENTION! Next, we describe the essence of a specific litigation. In the text can be found dry legal terms. We advise you to remove children, women and other people with vulnerable psyche from the screens.
Used picture from the site Pikabu.ru
" Who owns the information, he owns the world" N. Rothschild (This quote was very much asked to put the author of the legal part of the article Ilya Lvov. We could not refuse him.)
The Yekaterinburg lawyer Anton Leonidovich Burkov , who drew attention to the fact that Google offers in the form of contextual advertising to acquire a mobile phone, go on holiday or visit a restaurant, initiated the sensational case. It would seem that the usual situation.
')
“But how does the search engine choose an advertising offer to direct to a specific user?” Anton Leonidovich probably asked himself then. Not everyone even thinks about it, because it’s so familiar, so obvious and so easily explained from a marketing point of view. But what conclusion did the lawyer: Google through AdWords analyzes even the correspondence of users and on its basis selects the advertising product. The AdWords information system provides the ability to advertise on websites and in mail to Google International LLC, the owner of the search engine and mail service of the same name.
If we speak absolutely dry legal language, then it works on the territory of Russia like this:
advertising company Google LLC, on its own behalf, concludes agreements for the provision of advertising services with customers in Russia. Based on these contracts, provides placement of advertising information of clients using AdWords. The client, who orders advertising services, independently selects where to place his advertisement: in a search engine, in mailboxes, etc., using the service’s custom settings.
It turns out that Google, albeit in an automated way, but still “reads” the correspondence! This is not a discovery for anyone, and no one expected someone to go to court because of this.
It should be noted that Google is not the only one so beautiful: Yandex, Mail and other search engines using their services also do this, just not a single Yekaterinburg lawyer has reached them yet.
Referring to the secret of correspondence guaranteed to every Russian citizen, Anton Leonidovich appealed to the court where he lost the case in the first instance. The court pointed out that the claimant did not provide the court with any evidence confirming that it was Google LLC that was responsible for ensuring the work of the Gmail mail service and was looking at his personal correspondence.
But justice prevailed! The second instance overturned the above decision. The panel of judges was more attentive to the study of documents on the case and came to the opposite conclusion, concluding that Google still acts contrary to the Constitution of Mother Our Great Russia and violates the rights of its citizens.
The court supported this conclusion with the following data:
The official website of Google contains information that one of its branches is located in the Russian Federation and that, you won’t believe Google LLC is the defendant in this lawsuit. In this case, Google LLC, adhering to the corporate discipline, uses the Google logo, as well as software owned by Google International LLC. In addition, Google LLC concludes contracts for the provision of advertising services with clients in Russia and provides for the placement of client advertisements using AdWords.
Moreover, Google does not even hide the fact that it reads correspondence: according to the product’s privacy policy, posted on the official website of the search engine in the “How we use the collected data” section, it’s stated:
“... our systems automatically analyze your content to provide features useful to you. These can be search results selected for you, relevant advertisements, detection of spam and malware ... "
The court of second instance concluded that
Google LLC, in the performance of its obligations under advertising contracts and its effective distribution in the Google product segment, conducts automatic monitoring of emails and places advertisements in private correspondence of Russian citizens using Google services.
At the same time, the court indicated that the argument of Google LLC that it does not affect the criteria for displaying advertisements, since the AdWords settings are determined by the parent company in America, is untenable, because the defendant must bear the risks on his own, knowing that the software he uses violates Russian constitutional rights citizens.
Based on the foregoing, the judicial authority of the second instance concluded that, by placing advertisements in Anton Leonidovich’s messages, Googol was guided by the results of monitoring his correspondence and thus violating the secrecy of his correspondence. No evidence to the contrary was submitted to the court.
In addition, Anton Leonidovich demanded the recovery of moral damage caused by Google. I had every right to do this:
“According to Article 151 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, if a citizen has suffered moral damage by actions that violate his personal non-property rights, the court may impose on the violator the obligation of monetary compensation for the specified damage. By virtue of Article 1101 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, compensation for moral damage is made in monetary form and is determined by the court depending on the nature of the moral suffering caused to the victim, as well as the degree of guilt of the harm-taker. ”
Assessing the level of feelings suffered by the claimant, the court charged 50,000 rubles in his favor.
"Cats tears!" - you say? But given the fact that the decision in this case has received the broadest response, the claims can be showered on Google as a cornucopia, however, as well as on other mail services. Following the successful example of the Yekaterinburg lawyer, many e-mail users will also want to stop spamming and reading the correspondence. If you have the mood and you can sue, shemka will always be at hand.
So it goes. And you are surprised that the state wants to take contextual advertising under control. The “big brother” follows, and our Fatherland cares about the safety of its citizens day and night. And not what you thought everything there and wrote in their social networks.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/296476/
All Articles