google Google bans Glass from its own shareholder meeting

[V-Tech]

Google shareholders and other individuals were in for a surprise when they arrived at the company?s annual shareholder meeting on Thursday. Google, ironically, banned attendees from wearing the company?s own wearable computing device at the meeting. The company forbade people from using electronic devices such as smartphones, cameras and recording devices. The restriction infuriated the nonprofit watchdog organization Consumer Watchdog, which called out Google executives as hypocrites.

?Google has unleashed one of the most privacy invasive devices ever,? John M. Simpson, privacy project director at Consumer Watchdog, said in a press release. ?Google Glass aids and abets people who want to invade our privacy by videoing or photographing us surreptitiously, but when it comes to their own privacy Google executives jealously guard it.?

Simpson is a stern opponent of Google Glass and recently called for Google to give consumers a way to remove videos or photos from the company?s database that were taken by Glass users. The group blasted Google for its ?long record of making everyone else?s information public, but insisting on secrecy about its operations.?

Google Glass isn?t expected to be available to consumers until early next year, however the device has already seen its fair share of criticism. Some early reviews have called Glass ?creepy,? invasive and likely to fail.

http://bgr.com/2013/06/07/google-glass-banned-shareholder-meeting/

[jakem1]

Hypocrites.

[Grinch]

Hypocrites.

How is it hypocritical to forbid a device that has recording capability just like other forbidden devices for their meeting? I can understand if they allowed smartphones but didn't allow Google Glass, then I'd understand some anger there... but they forbid both. Gee, Google makes Android so why aren't they ****ed about blacklisting smartphones?

Sounds more like complaining for the sake of it to me. :|

[V-Tech]

How is it hypocritical to forbid a device that has recording capability just like other forbidden devices for their meeting? I can understand if they allowed smartphones but didn't allow Google Glass, then I'd understand some anger there... but they forbid both. Gee, Google makes Android so why aren't they ****ed about blacklisting smartphones?

Sounds more like complaining for the sake of it to me. :|

Ye, have to agree here. They treat GG as a recording device and they just don't want recording devices in the meetings.

No need to read too much in to it.

[ahhell]

Ye, have to agree here. They treat GG as a recording device and they just don't want recording devices in the meetings.

No need to read too much in to it.

So if there is "no need to read too much in to it", why did you post it then? :s

[vcfan]

its going to be hilarious when the guys defending this device get their credit cards and other sensitive info stolen just by someone taking a quick glance and having a permanent copy.

[V-Tech]

So if there is "no need to read too much in to it", why did you post it then? :s

I posted it because it's news. Not all news has to be shocking and surprising.

[bandit_liberty_rumble]

While it is hypocritical, I certainly don't blame them for it. I like (though try to avoid) Google products, but consider them a pretty scary company nowadays and find it hard to believe what comes out of the CEO's mouth from time to time, e.g. this little well-known gem:

"If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place."

In other words, total transparency. :/

[Dot Matrix]

Ha!

[Louisifer]

"The company forbade people from using electronic devices such as smartphones, cameras and recording devices"

It's not hypocritical.. Google Glass does all of that, some people are just annoyed that they cant use their new toy.

[jakem1]

How is it hypocritical to forbid a device that has recording capability just like other forbidden devices for their meeting? I can understand if they allowed smartphones but didn't allow Google Glass, then I'd understand some anger there... but they forbid both. Gee, Google makes Android so why aren't they ****ed about blacklisting smartphones?

Sounds more like complaining for the sake of it to me. :|

They're hypocrites because they're more than happy to ignore everyone else's privacy whilst protecting their own. All they've done here is highlight what a terrible idea Google Glass is.

[bandit_liberty_rumble]

"The company forbade people from using electronic devices such as smartphones, cameras and recording devices"

It's not hypocritical..

It's totally understandable that they want their privacy.

[V-Tech]

They're hypocrites because they're more than happy to ignore everyone else's privacy whilst protecting their own. All they've done here is highlight what a terrible idea Google Glass is.

Look at the quote above, where it say that they ban all electronic devices from the meetings. Does that mean that android phones are a terrible idea as well?

[jakem1]

Look at the quote above, where it say that they ban all electronic devices from the meetings. Does that mean that android phones are a terrible idea as well?

I've made two related points. The first is that Google are hypocrites for protecting their own privacy but not anyone else's. The second is that Google Glass is designed to undermine people's privacy in a way that smartphones never can. If you choose to buy an Android phone then you're happy to have Google access all your data and nobody else is affected. If you buy Google Glass then you're happy to invade other people's privacy. Everybody's but Google's that is.

[V-Tech]

I've made two related points. The first is that Google are hypocrites for protecting their own privacy but not anyone else's. The second is that Google Glass is designed to undermine people's privacy in a way that smartphones never can. If you choose to buy an Android phone then you're happy to have Google access all your data and nobody else is affected. If you buy Google Glass then you're happy to invade other people's privacy. Everybody's but Google's that is.

You will probably disagree but in my opinion a company has much more to lose if the companies privacy is invaded than an individual....

I never understood the whole privacy fear people have. I believe that if I have nothing to hide than I have no problem allowing Google to collect data about me. It hurts me in no way (at least not something I can think about right now).

[exotoxic]

It's totally understandable that they want their privacy.

That's the point though, they want their privacy but they are not bothered about anyone elses, unless (hopefully) places ban the use of glass.

[bandit_liberty_rumble]

That's the point though, they want their privacy but they are not bothered about anyone elses, unless (hopefully) places ban the use of glass.

I know. That's what I was trying to convey. Might have been less obvious than I thought. ;)

[TAZMINATOR]

I've made two related points. The first is that Google are hypocrites for protecting their own privacy but not anyone else's. The second is that Google Glass is designed to undermine people's privacy in a way that smartphones never can. If you choose to buy an Android phone then you're happy to have Google access all your data and nobody else is affected. If you buy Google Glass then you're happy to invade other people's privacy. Everybody's but Google's that is.

It is about protecting secrets in the meetings... that Google does not want Glass users to recording the secrets and share it with other users via Glass..

It is not about protecting 'personal' privacy in the meetings...

Google makes sure nothing go out until they release the info at the upcoming events, or press release.

Think about that.

Edit: added personal above..

Edited June 7, 2013 by shozilla

[bandit_liberty_rumble]

It is not about protecting privacy in the meetings...

I disagree. "Protecting secrets" may be the reason they require the meeting to be private.

[farmeunit]

They're hypocrites because they're more than happy to ignore everyone else's privacy whilst protecting their own. All they've done here is highlight what a terrible idea Google Glass is.

It's not hypocritical if they ban all other recording devices, which they do. It's a business meeting.

Not to mention, any other establishment can ban them. It's the wearers that could invade privacy. It's no different than carrying a hidden camera around. Google Glasses are at least in the open. We've had hidden cameras and such for YEARS and all of a sudden Google Glasses are the devil?

That's the point though, they want their privacy but they are not bothered about anyone elses, unless (hopefully) places ban the use of glass.

Then we should ban any other recording device, because you can just as easily hold your phone down to your side and record, or act like you're talking to someone and record, or buy a miniature recording device which have been around for YEARS. And already places do ban Google Glass. If THOSE places don't want to be hypocrites, then they should be all other devices, like Google.

[McKay]

Hypocrites.

Ill bet Cameras and recording devices are forbidden in other company meetings or R&D Labs, does that make Nokia, HTC, Samsung, Apple, Blackberry hypocrites?

[bandit_liberty_rumble]

Ill bet Cameras and recording devices are forbidden in other company meetings or R&D Labs, does that make Nokia, HTC, Samsung, Apple, Blackberry hypocrites?

Do the companies you've named have a similar stance on individual privacy as Google does, though?

[TAZMINATOR]

I disagree. "Protecting secrets" may be the reason they require the meeting to be private.

I was talking about personal privacy... like "Hey! I dont want to be in picture taken, put that away!"

The Glasses are banned in the meetings because of meeting secrets... it is not about personal privacy..

[farmeunit]

Do the companies you've named have a similar stance on individual privacy as Google does, though?

It's not individual privacy in a shareholder's meeting. How hard is that to understand for people?

Do they allow they elsewhere at Google? Yes.

[McKay]

Do the companies you've named have a similar stance on individual privacy as Google does, though?

Apple do, they sell your preferences and miscellaneous details onto companies for more tailored iAds. And what aspects are you referring to? So Google passes what stuff I search for onto advertisers so they can aim theirs at me? I use adblock for a start. And think about it, even if I didn't use adblock, I'f im on a site where an ad would get aimed at me in the first place, would I prefer a generic ad selling Viagra, or an ad about something that I may potentially be interested in?