Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 18.104.22.168
Forum Moderators: goodroi
“We want to be pragmatic and get to a point where we can continue to invest in building great products for everyone,” he said.
Brittin acknowledged that Google had failed to explain its business and vision to policymakers in Brussels and elsewhere in Europe, and said that the company was trying to adjust its American-rooted Silicon Valley image.Google Trying to Alter Its US-Rooted Image With EU [politico.eu]
[edited by: fathom at 11:49 am (utc) on Jun 7, 2015]
You seem to be talking about a completely different thing when it comes to a "claim". The EC published its statement of claims on the previous action and Google had ten weeks to reply to these claims. The evidence underlying those claims, gather as part of its investigations, would have been forwarded to Google. It is up to the EU to show Google and whatever court may rule on the issue the evidence rather than you.
The EU legislation on database rights is legislation. The US coverage is, from reading those reports, just based on a number of judicial decisions rather than well defined legislation.
Here's a rather important line from the 1997 report you cited above: "The report does not make recommendations on either the advisability or the form of any database protection legislation."
US Law is overwhelming based on case law... I concede that. But just because there is EU legislation does not mean an EU crime occurred.This a problem that occurs when people start throwing around legal terms without understanding them. With EU legislation, there are clear legal definitions. This makes it less of an argument based on case law. However the claims, and their supporting evidence, have not been published yet and it is not known if the EU's database legislation will be a part of it.
Well sure, but again if an EU located datacenter committed a crime in the US that is governed by US Law not EU law.
Isn't this similar to where data centres are located and their tax implications?And the regulatory frameworks that apply in those jurisdictions. The tax avoidance schemes used by Google in the EU maybe providing a lot of the motivation behind these actions. Google has many companies within the EU and for them, EU and national laws apply. This is something that many of the webmasters, SEO heads and assorted bloggers commenting on this matter fail to understand as they only think of Google as a single, US based, entity.
Perhaps you should read some reports on this from reliable sources
Waffling about "crimes" is highly inaccurate and is quite misleading.