[justin101]

I am as horrified as you probably are, but Google is quite possibly not allowed (by law) to share certain links. Even if technically allowed, their lawyers would likely not let them participate or facilitate sharing links to sites that would be deemed "facilitating illegal activity".

People are starting to learn why all their s*t should not be up in the cloud.

[CoolGuySteve]

This isn't sharing, these bookmarks are private to the user in question.

[TylerE]

It is for sharing. This is their shared/public bookmark collections, not browser bookmarks.

[CoolGuySteve]

No it's not, read the comments. This is their synced bookmarks that are not publicly shared.

[jp-x-g]

I think this depends on a radical redefinition of what it means to "share" something. If I put a book in a self-storage unit, and later go to retrieve it, is the owner of the property "providing" or "sharing" the book? What if I am leasing an apartment from a landlord?

I suppose it is an issue inherent to services set up to run through central providers, who can institute arbitrary controls on the services, i.e. if they don't they are failing to do so, which of course exposes them to liability and censure, et cetera.

[justin101]

Irrespective of this is right or wrong, the concern of the lawyers at google would not be "If Google _should_ be held accountable for the private activity of users", the concern of the lawyers will always be "what _could_ they be held accountable for."

[heavyset_go]

Section 230 of the CDA shields Google from liability for the links users choose to share using their services or not.

[justin101]

I doubt that applies if they have a court order or request from the FBI to block certain domain names or links.

If you had a court order or "request for cooperation" from the FBI to block that domain name, would you do it?