Google sued (by N.Y. Democratic lawmaker) as source of porn

[Newsjock]

http://www.newsday.com/business/ny-bzgoog0505,0,2601653.story?coll=ny-top-headlines

A Nassau County legislator filed a lawsuit Thursday claiming Google Inc. generates "billions of dollars from the pornography trade and illicit profiteers."

The lawsuit by four-term legislator Jeffrey Toback (D-Oceanside) calls the Internet search engine the world's largest distributor of child pornography, claiming that child porn is part of the company's business model. Google "continues to put its economic gains ahead of the interests and well-being of America's children," the lawsuit, filed in Nassau State Supreme Court alleges.

... Though Google provides a filter called SafeSearch, it doesn't eliminate all adult material, and nothing prevents children from turning it off.

Toback, self-described as "not the most computer-literate guy," said he learned of the filter three days ago. He said he didn't know if the computers in his home have commercial filtering software that blocks pornography and other material unsuitable for children.

[xchrom]

1. ...

:eyes:

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

2. Ugh...why doesn't he just worry about his own computer?

Let the rest of us have porn. Child porn is illegal. You want to crack down on child porn? Go for it. I completely support throwing everyone involved in child pornography in jail.

As for the rest of the stuff, if you don't want to look at it, don't. Everyone has a right to let their freak flag fly provided it's safe, sane and consensual between two or more adults of any gender.

You don't want your kids to fine porn on the internet? Install a blocker (even though they often block informative websites as well) and monitor what your kids are doing. Of course, in order to do that, you need to learn how to use your computer and figure out whether or not you have NetNanny or some crap on it. Obviously, it would be much easier to just sue Google.

[bitchkitty]

11. Not only learn to use the computer, but actually monitor

your child! My sis has the computer in the dining room, at a corner desk. The older kids have their own computer, but not the little ones. It's a scary world out there, but it's not Google's fault or responsibility to monitor his child.

[Kutjara]

3. Seems the Repugs don't have the monopoly on stupidity.

So this guy who knows nothing about computers and hasn't a clue what's on his own computers at home just happens to know all about Google's business model.

He also seems to know that Google serves up child porn, which presumably means he went looking for it. I would therefore assume that some of it is still accessible on his hard drive. That is a crime.

I assume the Task Force will be carting the buffoon off any minute now.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

4. Seriously.

I've never found any child porn on google. Then again, I've never searched for it. I have looked at other porn, but I never accidentally got child porn in my searches.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

6. lol!

me either....

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

9. "Oh no! I try to google 'bush is a dumbass' and a naked child popped up!"

"Ahh!!!! I googled 'lesbian erotica' and a naked child popped up!"

[Zynx]

16. LOL!

[zbdent]

20. Depends on who's defining child porn

an ultra-conservative trying to score points and win an office, or a legit photographer who takes a polaroid of their baby on a bearskin rug . . . both could have extremely different views on whether the same picture is porn . . .

Been to any real naturist websites? There's plenty of what a prosecutor trying to advance his or her political career could label "kiddie porn" and claim "I would show you this disgusting picture, but it's too horrible!"

[BattyDem]

30. I said the same thing when I heard this story

I've NEVER seen any child porn on Google, not even by accident ... and the only time I've ever seen adult porn is if I went looking for it.

:wtf:

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

34. I've often found porn by accident

For example, one time I was thinking of changing my look so I was searching for new hairstyle ideas, but everything was way too young for me, so I googled something like "mature women hair" and holy shit, you wouldn't believe what I got back. I think it was the term "mature women"; there are apparently no sites designed to appeal to older women, just their, um, admirers.

[BattyDem]

38. I guess it all comes down to the "search terms"

I always enter very specific search terms, so maybe that's why I don't get porn. :shrug:

I'm a Google addict and I always use all of their little "tricks" to refine my search. I can usually get exactly what I want immediately. Google rules! :D

If anyone's interested, here are some links that guide you through everything Google can do. Most of you have probably seen all this stuff before - but maybe a few Google-newbies will find it useful. :-)

Google Special Features

Google Advanced Search Made Easy

Google Advanced Operators

Google Help: Cheat Sheet

Google Services & Tools

[Igel]

41. I had a job where I was briefly

immersed in gay porn. I was assigned to scope out websites for a university class on gay literature. There's no way to work out the search terms for websites devoted to serious discussions of gay literature, or discussions of serious gay literature, without dredging up some pretty outrageous sites. (And this was in '97 or so--fewer websites, but also fewer restrictions.)

I was rather shocked by the hits Google returned. I didn't know such sites exist. My wife walked into the room at one point and was also pretty shocked. I have trouble distinguishing between 16- and 18-year old kids, but some of the stuff almost certainly involved kids in their early teens and even preteens. Troubling stuff. And now illegal.

But I will admit this was a pretty specific kind of search, and say you're right. Seldom have I run into porn sites--usually it involved an incautious search term or a mistyped URL. And I don't think I've ever run into child porn.

[bleedingheart]

5. unfortunately stupid is universal...no one has a monopoly on it

[lonestarnot]

7. WTF?

[populistdriven]

8. someone please run against this miscreant!!!

[Zynx]

10. Oh like he's never looked at porn.

[beyurslf]

12. HOw'd he know so much about Google porn if he hadn't been using it?

[DUHandle]

15. A couple of weeks ago there was a photoshop Ann Colter

thread.

I dropped her name into Google images with safe search set to moderate, and came up with an image on second page that was pornographic.

[Hawkeye-X]

17. 3rd page, actually..

And this also came up..

[Vidar]

18. Good picture of Toback.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

24. I don't know. It looks like Coulter to me...

:shrug:

[TheCowsCameHome]

31. Ann is on the other end...........................

[Milspec]

35. Oh my, that is funny

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

13. More like "oh like he's never looked at child porn."

You have to search for it to find it on google.

[stepnw1f]

14. What an Ass

Go make your career as a Fox News Host.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

19. What a dumbass. I expect that kind of ignorance from GOPers, not Dems.

[mongo]

21. WTF?

What an ass. Why is it that all the anti-adult legislation being propossed lately is from Dems?

[Jed Dilligan]

22. Jeffrey Toback

I'll have to remember to vote for the Green if he ever enters a race I'm voting in.

[fshrink]

23. Since so many democrats find intelligent

to scratch the assholes' back, why wouldn't he?

[geniph]

25. A self-described computer illiterate

proposing regulations affecting the Internet is like putting someone who can't add in charge of the Federal Treasury. Or letting someone who can barely string together a coherent sentence tell the residents of the country they need to learn English.

...oh wait...

[not_nameless]

26. "Protecting" us again and again:

http://www.nassaucountyny.gov/agencies/legis/LD/07/index.html
"In 2002, Toback also led the way with legislation
banning smoking in all restaurants, bars and workplaces"

"also co-sponsored a law to protect Nassau teens from the
harmful effects of indoor tanning devices"

"local law that would ban the sale of toy guns in Nassau
County"

[Renew Deal]

27. I know this guy.

This is a bizarre story. The number 1 thing that keeps kids from messing with Google filters is parents. Where are they? And is google doing something specifically different than Yahoo, AOL, Ask Jeves, etc.?

[sarcasmo]

33. It's an election year and he is pandering to the Religious freaks.

[Renew Deal]

37. Wrong on both counts

Legislative elections are in odd years. Also, he represents a working class district. His area is not filled with religious freaks to pander to. He's been in office since 1999 and is pretty safe.

Besides that, I didn't think that keeping children from pornography was a religious issue.

[Canuckistanian]

28. Interstate Commerce! Interstate Commerce!

Guns OK, dirty pictures, no.

[benEzra]

29. See post #26...

this clown doesn't like guns, either...

[BattyDem]

32. I'm so sick of "nanny laws"

There are already laws against child porn and they should be strictly enforced. However, tax-paying adults have the right to look at "adult" material if they want to. Tax-paying adults have the right to do a LOT of things that aren't appropriate for children - that's why children have parents!

It's a parent's responsibility to lockup the liquor, guns, prescription drugs, porn mags, adult DVDs, etc. It's a parent's responsibility to set the parental control filters on the cable box or the television. It's a parent's responsibility to call the phone company and block the 976 numbers. Yet it's supposed to be the government's responsibility to "filter" the internet so children don't see "bad" things?? BULLSHIT!

I'm fed up with everyone trying to "protect children" from the Internet. The Internet is NOT pumped into anyone's home without their knowledge or consent. If an adult brings the Internet into their home, it is THEIR responsibility to install software and filters to protect their children from the things they don't want them to see ... period. If they don't do that - or if they don't know how to do that - it's not Google's fault or the government's fault.

THE INTERNET IS NOT AN ENTERTAINMENT CENTER OR A BABYSITTER! People MUST realize that when they bring the Internet into their home, they are connecting to the entire world - the good and the bad. No one would ever bring their child to the middle of a big city and leave them there alone, without supervision or protection. Yet they leave their children alone in the middle of a "virtual" city every single day without thinking twice about it. When something bad happens, they blame the web sites or the government for their own stupidity. ENOUGH ALREADY! If you give YOUR child access to the Internet, then it's YOUR responsibility to protect them and keep track of their online activities.

/jumps off the soap box/

[BiggJawn]

36. Oh, but it's "For the CHILDREN"!

C'mon folks, get behind this! Don't give the FReepies a chance to accuse us of "eating our own"!
Solidarity!

:sarcasm:

Whatta MAROON!

[Chrisduhfur]

39. Hmmm... The exact 'point' isn't clear

First they seem to speaking about google showing child porn but then it changes to how google doesn't filter porn that *may* be seen by a child... Kinda makes me think this guy is simply after google.

[Spider Jerusalem]

40. Christ. I'm sick of sanctimonious, moralising, posturing fuckwits...

trying to out-Republican the Republicans on 'values' issues.

From Tipper Gore and the Parents' Music Resource Centre to Hillary Clinton and her crusade against video games to this nitwit with his hard-on for pornography.

Here's a hint, you clueless pandering whores: it is the job of PARENTS to monitor this sort of thing. Not of the government. Music with explicit lyrics, violent and sexual video games, and pornography are aimed at an ADULT audience, NOT at children, and adults should have the right to enjoy them if they want without these twits getting involved. If you're incapable of monitoring the behaviour of your children, then I'd say you probably aren't a very good parent and you shouldn't have had kids in the first place.

[rocktivity]

42. Ridiculous--Google is a search engine, not an ISP.

And you can't search for what isn't there, can you?

Aren't the REAL villains here the people who put the child porn on the internet in the first place? Instead of wasting time on this, Toback should be working WITH Google to catch these monsters. But then again, by his own admission, he's not the most computer-literate guy.

:headbang:
rocknation

[Uncle Joe]

44. I am just speculating, but I wonder if he is in bed,

with the telecoms trying to kill Internet Neutrality? Google is fighting this and I imagine anything that weakens google would aid the telecoms in their endeavor.

[Kailassa]

43. This is not about child-porn. It's about information control.

Jeffrey Toback, Plant or Patsy?

Child porn is the stalking horse for those who want complete government control of all the media, particularly the internet.

If you can deny people the ability to share their thoughts with strangers,
and deny them the opportunity to hear anything but the government line,
you are also denying most people the ability to question their government.

When propaganda is all people have access to, there is no longer a democracy.

Anybody advocating increased censorship of the net is a traitor to all American freedom.

There is no need to rig elections if people can never be informed of where the government has gone wrong,
and never have an alternative presented.
There is no need even to hold elections after people have been indoctrinated for long enough.

Eliminating debate stops people from developing the ability to question cultural assumptions.
And that leaves a big part of the brain atrophying and infantalised.

The neocons want us all sucking from the same hynotic propaganda outlets.
They will never be satisfied until they have changed us from a society of Googlers to a big kindergarten of goo-gooers.