[Matt_Cutts]

Suffice it to say that many Google employees have looked into this, including me. After digging into the situation, I agree with the action that Google took in this case.

I also went and got Google's official comment: "For the privacy of those involved, we don't discuss motivations behind account suspensions but we are confident in our actions in this case."

I'm sorry that I can't go into more detail.

[guygurari]

Your responses remind me of disturbing passages from Kafka's The Trial. There is no need to discuss specifics in public, but why not let the Accused know the violation they've committed? Why is there no appeals process where the Accused can respond to specific allegations? And why not let the Accused download their data?

I'm sure your response seems reasonable to you, since you are familiar with the details, but try to understand what it looks like from the outside. Personally, once the Apple cloud is up I'm moving all my important data away of Google.

[Matt_Cutts]

I know that from the outside that it probably looks like Google has been unfair or uncaring in this case. I'm sorry that I can't go into the details.

[Matt_Cutts]

Now I can: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/bvqdos

[_delirium]

Ah man, child pornography, once again the edge case that screws up reasonable planning. Can't explain, for fear that if the user wasn't really guilty, you're taking a pretty serious step in accusing them of peddling child pornography. And also can't give them their data, for fear that if they were guilty, you're redistributing child pornography.

The only thing that might be nice, besides some personalized review of hard edge cases, is to allow users to export "untainted" data, if it can somehow be isolated. E.g. if one gallery was flagged, still let him export his uncontroversial email archives.

[josecastillo]

I think it would ameliorate a lot of the fear, uncertainty and doubt around this situation if Google could answer the following question: Does the user in question currently have the ability to extract the data he had in Google services, and if not, will Google provide him with his data?

If there's no way to answer that question without compromising his privacy, can Google at least share its policy on data liberation in situations such as this, and publicize it broadly via the Data Liberation Front?

[m8urn]

Right, and this is what has caused millions of people to panic today and realize that Google really can't be trusted with our data. If someone hacks you and does something with your account, or even if you just do something stupid, years of data is just gone like that with no explanation. Now to me Google is just as unreliable as keeping all my data on a single hard drive with no backup.

[Matt_Cutts]

Here's the resolution: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/bvqdos That explains why providing the data back to the user was a delicate issue.

[mukyu]

The response this time is striking different from a case[1] just a few days ago. Is this standard Google policy or did she just not talk to pr/the lawyers?

[1] http://www.reddit.com/r/google/comments/it8ah/when_google_de...

[nbajam]

Quit using the privacy BS excuse. THE USER IN QUESTION HAS NO CLUE WHY HIS ACCOUNT WAS CLOSED. TELL HIM.

[Devilboy]

What the fuck Matt, at least tell HIM what he supposedly did! WHAT THE FUUUUCK???