Why Is Google Fighting So Hard To Keep Filing In RosettaStone Lawsuit Secret?

from the open-up dept

Last year, we wrote about an effort by Public Citizen along with lawyers Eric Goldman and Martin Schwimmer, to have RosettaStone and Google remove the massive number of redactions that were made in the legal filings each has put forth in the companies' trademark dispute. As Paul Levy of Public Citizen noted at the time, this case will have important public policy impact on others, and it's only fair that the details be known. Despite being secretive upfront, it seems that RosettaStone has mostly been amenable to this and has provided unredacted filings (which have shown that the redacted info never should have been redacted in the first place). Yet, it appears that Google is still fighting this. Eric Goldman points out that Google appears to be working to avoid having to reveal what it redacted, though it's not clear why. Of course, all this really does is make you wonder what Google is hiding.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    icon
    Jay (profile), Feb 15th, 2011 @ 8:15pm

    *scratches head*

    Is it possible that Google is trying to hide their algorithm?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 15th, 2011 @ 8:39pm

    Re: *scratches head*

    Yes, there is one secret algorithm that can solve every search problem known to man and give away the secret powers of Google to anyone. and there was good reason why they thought this needed to be in the legal filings at the time as well.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 15th, 2011 @ 9:53pm

    Re: Re: *scratches head*

    well if there is one why would they put it in the legal filings? seems pretty stupid to me..

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Adam, Feb 15th, 2011 @ 11:18pm

    Secrets secrets are no fun.

    This could actually have something to do with their algorithm. Imagine trying to explain to the court how it works and why your innocent. I'd assume that there would actually be quite a bit of juicy information contained inside there from Google's "Expert" witnesses.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    Schmoo, Feb 16th, 2011 @ 2:19am

    The last time they did the right thing instead of just brushing it under the carpet like most companies would, half the world's morons jumped on the Google-hack bandwagon. Maybe they've learned?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    icon
    DevConcepts (profile), Feb 16th, 2011 @ 4:36am

    Re: Re: *scratches head*

    So Google has a "Rosetta Stone" of search?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    Oz, Feb 16th, 2011 @ 4:36am

    Re: *scratches head*

    I discovered that algorithm once but spent the rest of my days ranting on the street trying to get it out of my head it's mostly worked mostly oh look an icepick...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 16th, 2011 @ 4:48am

    google shouldn't have anything to worry about if they did nothing wrong.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    icon
    CommonSense (profile), Feb 16th, 2011 @ 4:48am

    Doing something wrong??

    Wasn't it one of the Google officials who famously stated that "If you're not doing anything wrong, then you should have nothing to hide" in response to why it's OK not to have privacy online......or something along those lines??

    Google trying to be secretive like this is very scary.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 16th, 2011 @ 6:17am

    Re:

    That's right! There's no smoke without fire! Except where something gives off smoke just before it actually catches fire, then there is smoke without fire. And cigarettes, mustn't forget cigarettes, they're not technically on fire, just very, very hot, enough to give off smoke anyway.

    So sometimes there is smoke without fire but you definitely cannot cry over spilt milk. I know, I've tried!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    identicon
    Google EyeBot, Feb 16th, 2011 @ 6:21am

    Re: Doing something wrong??

    Your comment has been noted Mr. Pickering of 44 Westing Avenue, NY. Please return home and wait for your Google representative to "congratulate" you.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 16th, 2011 @ 11:18am

    Re: Re:

    yeah you can, it makes the milk dilute and a tad salty.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    icon
    Ronald J Riley (profile), Feb 16th, 2011 @ 6:33pm

    Google is just as dirty as the others.

    Google is just as sleazy other other big corporations. All their talk about not having to be evil is just cover.

    We see again and again companies using every means possible to cover their dirty dealings rather than cleaning up their act.

    Huge success brings lots of cash. Large amounts of money bring nearly unlimited power with minimal accountability.

    Unlimited power always leads to absolute corruption.

    Ronald J. Riley,

    President - www.PIAUSA.org - RJR at PIAUSA.org

    Other Affiliations:
    Executive Director - www.InventorEd.org - RJR at InvEd.org
    Senior Fellow - www.PatentPolicy.org
    President - Alliance for American Innovation
    Caretaker of Intellectual Property Creators on behalf of deceased founder Paul Heckel
    Washington, DC
    Direct (202) 318-1595 - 9 am to 9 pm EST.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    identicon
    Fraud, Jan 21st, 2012 @ 9:55am

    Google was hiding fraud

    Google was hiding fraud. They had studies that show even college educated people (and Google's trademark chief) cannot tell the difference between sponsored links and content.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This