×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google Set To Meld Google Drive With Chrome OS

samzenpus posted about 2 years ago | from the when-our-powers-combine dept.

Cloud 109

MikeatWired writes "Google will tightly integrate its new Google Drive online storage service with an upcoming version of its Chrome OS operating system, says Sundar Pichai, who oversees development of the company's Chrome products as well as its Google Apps online services. Chrome OS is Google's effort to move all applications and data onto the web (and its Chrome browser), but the OS still hasn't mastered the art of moving files from place to place. By integrating Chrome OS with Google Drive — the online storage service Google introduced on Tuesday — the company seeks to correct this problem. 'With Chromebooks, [Google Drive] is even more powerful,' Pichai says, 'because it just starts working naturally. Your local drive is also Google Drive. This makes it really powerful because you just don't think about it.' Basically, Google Drive — a service that operates on the web — will perform as if it was the local file system. If you open the 'save file' dialog box on Chrome OS, for instance, the system will take you straight to Google Drive. 'We'll effectively integrate [Google] Drive into the native file system of Chrome OS,' says Scott Johnson, Google's Google Drive product manager. 'All the core OS functionality will use [Google] Drive as a place to store data — if that's what you opt in to.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

109 comments

So they can own and track ALL your files? (2, Insightful)

recoiledsnake (879048) | about 2 years ago | (#39797537)

From http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/how-far-do-google-drives-terms-go-in-owning-your-files/75228 [zdnet.com]

Google Drive terms:

“Your Content in our Services: When you upload or otherwise submit content to our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide licence to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes that we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content

Dropbox's and Skydrive's terms are more sane.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (4, Interesting)

goombah99 (560566) | about 2 years ago | (#39797601)

So if you write a manuscript for a movie on chrome OS then you are giving permission to google to make it into a movie if they want. Amazing.

Does this mean you also can't store on your G-drive anything you don't have permission to reproduce. For example, if I am reviewing a manuscript an I place it on my Gdrive then I've given permission to Google to reproduce it. Yet I don't have that permission to grant.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39797645)

They have to have those permissions for things like OCR and image search to work. If you really think their goal is to steal it, then I think you are a bit misinformed.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (4, Insightful)

TechNY (2625421) | about 2 years ago | (#39797723)

Please submit me all of your personal files, tax returns, pictures of ex girlfriends and open your webcam. This is so that I can program my OCR to work better. Promise!

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39801591)

Please submit me all of your personal files, tax returns, pictures of ex girlfriends and open your webcam. This is so that I can program my OCR to work better. Promise!

You have no use for my data that benefits me, you have no track record of good behavior, and you have noting to lose by abusing the information I give you. None of those things are true of Google.

Google has a long track record of taking good care of my data. Not perfect, but on balance much better than any other company I have dealt with. Never recording any data anywhere would be "safer", in the same way that never leaving my house would make it less likely that I would contract an illness. Google has a lot to lose by misusing my data. On balance, it makes sense to trust them.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (2)

Overly Critical Guy (663429) | about 2 years ago | (#39801979)

Google has a long track record of taking good care of my data.

This is the same company that sniffed neighborhood wifi data, stored it in an indexed database for two years, and then suddenly realized their "accident" when German investigators began probing.

Never recording any data anywhere would be "safer", in the same way that never leaving my house would make it less likely that I would contract an illness.

There is a line, and the question is whether or not you're okay with sweeping it toward the side of making money for advertising companies or toward the privacy and respect of users.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39802901)

This is the same company that sniffed neighborhood wifi data, stored it in an indexed database for two years, and then suddenly realized their "accident" when German investigators began probing.

Yeah, that was a horrible violation of WiFi routers' rights...

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (1)

dudpixel (1429789) | about 2 years ago | (#39803183)

How would this benefit me?

Why should I trust you?

What have you got to lose if you betray my trust?

What is your track record like?

I can answer all of these (for myself) for Google - but not for you.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39797741)

> They have to have those permissions for things like OCR and image search to work.

If you think that's the only implication, then I think you're a bit naiive.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39798341)

If I were the NSA/CIA I'd be giving Google (and Facebook) a fair bit of "advertising" money for their help in certain matters...

By the way, would the NSA be legally considered to be spying on US citizens if Google is the one doing the spying and the NSA is just paying them for reports or "tip-offs"?

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (1)

Grelfod (1222108) | about 2 years ago | (#39799159)

but I thought that the CIA owned Facebook?! LOL I guess that the *insert government agency acronym* NSA? could have Google.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (1)

ozmanjusri (601766) | about 2 years ago | (#39802517)

If you think that's the only implication, then I think you're a bit naiive.

If you're concerned about your IP, you shouldn't use cloud storage.

Microsoft's SkyDrive terms aren't a lot different

* You understand that Microsoft may need, and you hereby grant Microsoft the right, to use, modify, adapt, reproduce, distribute, and display content posted on the service solely to the extent necessary to provide the service.*

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (1)

Y-Crate (540566) | about 2 years ago | (#39802951)

If you think that's the only implication, then I think you're a bit naiive.

If you're concerned about your IP, you shouldn't use cloud storage.

Microsoft's SkyDrive terms aren't a lot different

* You understand that Microsoft may need, and you hereby grant Microsoft the right, to use, modify, adapt, reproduce, distribute, and display content posted on the service solely to the extent necessary to provide the service.*

I think the last line makes it significantly different than the Google EULA.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39797789)

IF their intent is not to steal it why would they include "publicly perform" in what that can do with your stuff?

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (2)

Joce640k (829181) | about 2 years ago | (#39797975)

Because their standard license (which is what this is) also covers youtube, etc.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39798025)

Well that makes it ok then.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (3, Insightful)

rtfa-troll (1340807) | about 2 years ago | (#39798673)

Because their standard license (which is what this is) also covers youtube, etc.

If Google goes bankrupt, then this license may end up being the only thing protecting your data. I don't think that they are doing this maliciously and I do think that if enough people protest that will fix it, but I don't think it should just be dismissed by saying "oh; they promised not to be evil". If you think Google can't go bankrupt, please remember that five years ago Microsoft also looked completely invulnerable. Almost nobody could imagine them not being dominant in personal computing. Things like iOS and Android turn up and suddenly they look like DEC dealing with the arrival of the Microprocessor. In ten years time the same could easily happen to Google.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (2)

Enderandrew (866215) | about 2 years ago | (#39797823)

This is one of the few sane comments and it is modded flamebait. Please mod parent up.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39797963)

I can't see the sky if I'm blind. Also sane, also not worth modding up.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (1, Insightful)

toddmbloom (1625689) | about 2 years ago | (#39798201)

Either way, storing your data with GOOGLE is just asking for trouble. When have they ever done anything that's good for the consumer and not good for their advertising bottom line?

If the agreement quoted in part by the GP above (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39798737)

is in place, and it does not specifically exclude the interactions between Chrome and Google Drive that are the topic of this thread, then Google is free to do what the agreement says. It doesn't matter that "They have to have those permissions for things like OCR and image search to work.". It only matters what the agreement says. (Notwithstanding any supervening law, of course.)

Posting AC because I moderated. IAAL.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (5, Insightful)

yincrash (854885) | about 2 years ago | (#39798237)

The TOS is for all Google services. It limits itself with a clause that follows that the GP decided to omit.

The rights that you grant in this licence are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This licence continues even if you stop using our Services (for example, for a business listing that you have added to Google Maps).”

As well as this clause:

Some of our Services allow you to submit content. You retain ownership of any intellectual property rights that you hold in that content. In short, what belongs to you stays yours.

The performance clause is almost certainly for other services besides Google Drive like YouTube.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (1)

The MAZZTer (911996) | about 2 years ago | (#39798345)

That was my first reaction, didn't Google already go through this with Chrome? They ended up changing the ToS to be more clear that that part did not cover Chrome.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (2, Interesting)

SirGarlon (845873) | about 2 years ago | (#39798537)

The performance clause is almost certainly for other services besides Google Drive like YouTube.

I agree that's probably the intent, but the fact remains that Google Drive's terms of service allow them to publicly perform your data.

That kind of suggests putting all 60+ of Google's services under a single TOS was perhaps over-simplifying and not the best idea.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39800237)

You can make Google Drive files public. They need the right to perform them in that case.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (1)

HexaByte (817350) | about 2 years ago | (#39799255)

That still doesn't cut it. By putting something on their system I have to give them rights to "perform" the work? As in YouTube? But I just want to store that video of my and the Missus doing the nasty, not let it be posted on YouTube. And NOT have it be posted on a 'Future Service' know as Google Porn that they developed subsequent to my posting it.

Of course, I never store anything I value or want kept personal in the cloud. No, this will be one Google service that I'll not be using.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (1)

DragonWriter (970822) | about 2 years ago | (#39801827)

That still doesn't cut it. By putting something on their system I have to give them rights to "perform" the work? As in YouTube? But I just want to store that video [...] not let it be posted on YouTube.

The terms of service expressly note that the user has further power to control the use of content on particular services via settings on those services. While perhaps that could be highlighted more, I can't see any reasonable way of reading that that doesn't commit Google to respect those settings when they are present in a service (as settings are in, among other services, both Drive and YouTube which allow content to be designated as non-public -- and this is the default in Drive.)

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (1)

StinkiePhish (891084) | about 2 years ago | (#39800415)

Your Content in our Services: When you upload or otherwise submit content to our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide licence to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes that we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content

The rights that you grant in this licence are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This licence continues even if you stop using our Services (for example, for a business listing that you have added to Google Maps).”

Some of our Services allow you to submit content. You retain ownership of any intellectual property rights that you hold in that content. In short, what belongs to you stays yours.

The clauses go hand in hand. Yes, you maintain ownership because you are not assigning all of your rights to Google when you upload a file. The problem comes with the overly broad grant of a license from you (as owner) to Google (as licensee). The limiting language used by Google is not enough to ensure that you do not intend to give them permission to make your otherwise private material public in ways you hadn't anticipated.

Google does not need to own your IP to do (almost) anything it wants with your material; all they need is a broad enough license.

Performance rights apply to Drive for good reason (1)

DragonWriter (970822) | about 2 years ago | (#39801807)

The performance clause is almost certainly for other services besides Google Drive like YouTube.

It is also for services like Docs/Drive that, like YouTube, allow sharing content and which, like YouTube, allow something that might be construed as "performing" the content. (E.g., showing of Docs presentations.)

Note that the terms of service both expressly recognizes that the user retains ownership of content and expressly references user control of content through "settings" in particular Services.

Also note that in US law (under which, and particularly California law, per its own terms the Google TOS are governed), an agreement whose terms are wholly controlled by one party is generally interpreted as generously as it can be reasonably read in favor of the other party.

The theory being that the written terms of an agreement aren't what is controlling so much as the "meeting of the minds" for which the terms serve as evidence. So when you have an agreement that is a public offer with terms controlled by one party rather than the product of negotiation between the parties, the only fair interpretation of where the "meeting of the minds" was is the place most favorable to the party who didn't control the text, but only read it.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (0, Redundant)

geekoid (135745) | about 2 years ago | (#39798399)

no. He didn't quote the whole license.
He left out the bit wher eit says it's only to improve services:

"The rights that you grant in this licence are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This licence continues even if you stop using our Services (for example, for a business listing that you have added to Google Maps).”"

Cause he is either stupid or a hater. haha I kid, he's both.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (2)

Local ID10T (790134) | about 2 years ago | (#39798875)

Try scrolling down a bit...

The rights you grant in this license are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting, and improving our Services, and to develop new ones.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (1)

aztracker1 (702135) | about 2 years ago | (#39800489)

Wow, so when you put that video of you and the Mrs. up... and google develops google.com/pr0n, they can use it (develop new service)...

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (1)

DragonWriter (970822) | about 2 years ago | (#39800639)

Does this mean you also can't store on your G-drive anything you don't have permission to reproduce.

Given that putting a file on Google Drive -- or any similar cloud-based storage system -- involves taking a file for which you have a local copy and reproducing it remotely (potentially multiple times), that should be fairly obvious.

For example, if I am reviewing a manuscript an I place it on my Gdrive then I've given permission to Google to reproduce it.

Well, yeah. Its pretty hard for them to store it in their redundant storage systems, and make it available for you to use on multiple devices, without reproducing it.

Yet I don't have that permission to grant.

If you don't have the right to have a third-party agent make multiple copies of something on your behalf, you probably shouldn't be directing them to do so. The problem is not the fact that their Terms of Service explicitly call out that you need to give them permission for the things that they need to do to implement your requests when you use the service.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (2)

vlm (69642) | about 2 years ago | (#39797633)

publicly perform, publicly display and distribute

No amateur pr0n on GOOG drive, unless you're into the exhibitionist stuff too.

I'm mystified why they'd have that in the terms, other than for pissing people off.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (-1, Redundant)

geekoid (135745) | about 2 years ago | (#39798435)

Becasue ti's theior stander ToS; which includes Youtube, etc.

of course, there is this:
"The rights that you grant in this licence are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This licence continues even if you stop using our Services (for example, for a business listing that you have added to Google Maps).”"

so, not a big deal.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (1)

icebraining (1313345) | about 2 years ago | (#39798483)

So that you can set a file as "public" and give an URL to anyone? That would be publicly display and distribute.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39797661)

the terms kinda makes sense for many of googles other services, one can hope they just forgot to make the terms for google drive different
that is if they want anyone to use it

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (4, Insightful)

Danzigism (881294) | about 2 years ago | (#39797725)

Unless of course, it infringes upon your own intellectual copyright. [wikipedia.org]

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (2)

robot256 (1635039) | about 2 years ago | (#39799285)

What's your point? They can't infringe your rights because by using the service you gave them a license to use it however they want. If you didn't own the copyright or have the right to issue the license, then it will infringe upon the third party that owns the material, but never you, the user.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (2)

Animats (122034) | about 2 years ago | (#39797731)

Mod parent up. That is way, way out of line.

Other remote file services aren't like that. If you use, say, iDrive, not only do they not claim such rights, their server doesn't even have your encryption key.

For completeness, iCloud's terms: (5, Interesting)

SirGarlon (845873) | about 2 years ago | (#39797783)

For completeness, Apple iCloud's terms of service [apple.com] say:

Except for material we may license to you, Apple does not claim ownership of the materials and/or Content you submit or make available on the Service. However, by submitting or posting such Content on areas of the Service that are accessible by the public or other users with whom you consent to share such Content, you grant Apple a worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive license to use, distribute, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, publicly perform and publicly display such Content on the Service solely for the purpose for which such Content was submitted or made available, without any compensation or obligation to you.

Which sounds pretty reasonable. The problem comes earlier in the "agreement,"

Apple reserves the right to take steps Apple believes are reasonably necessary or appropriate to enforce and/or verify compliance with any part of this Agreement. You acknowledge and agree that Apple may, without liability to you, access, use, preserve and/or disclose your Account information and Content to law enforcement authorities, government officials, and/or a third party,

So the "agreement" grants Apple privileges to spy on your data and pass it along to any unspecified "third party" or their choice, if they feel like you might be doing something they dislike. I read it; I didn't sign it. I don't think anyone should.

Re:For completeness, iCloud's terms: (1)

dontmakemethink (1186169) | about 2 years ago | (#39798275)

So this is the new way of getting malware on our computers, corporate endorsement. Still see it for what it is.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (2)

Jeng (926980) | about 2 years ago | (#39797815)

This sounds like a very very very bad idea, no way can it be as stupid as it sounds.

This means that if I put anything that is copyrighted on the google drive I could then be prosecuted for distributing copyrighted material, and google would also be liable since they then claim license over the files I uploaded.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (1)

rtfa-troll (1340807) | about 2 years ago | (#39798819)

[..] google would also be liable since they then claim license over the files I uploaded.

If you had read the fine article and followed the links (don't reply "you must be new here"; I am the RTFA troll; you will have been trolled) then you would have noticed this term:

Make sure that you have the necessary rights to grant us this licence for any content you submit to our Services.

Do you think Google's lawyers were born yesterday? You will come into the court room strictly on your own. Google's largest likely involvement will be to twist the knife the (MP/RI)AA sticks into you.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (1)

Jeng (926980) | about 2 years ago | (#39799117)

Yep, was thinking about putting up a did not RTFA post.

And no, I did not think that Google's management nor it's lawyers would be stupid enough to do what was posted they were doing.

Hmmm, I really should RTFA now rather than respond to what you posted, but what the hell, why not?

Make sure that you have the necessary rights to grant us this licence for any content you submit to our Services.

Ok, so taking in what you posted still does not get them out of hot water, and still keeps me in hot water. Just because I was lax in not getting a license before I stored mp3's n such that does not excuse google from not having a license for files on their service.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (1)

rtfa-troll (1340807) | about 2 years ago | (#39799211)

Ok, so taking in what you posted still does not get them out of hot water, and still keeps me in hot water. Just because I was lax in not getting a license before I stored mp3's n such that does not excuse google from not having a license for files on their service.

Luckily for you that's not mentioned in the article ;-) However, in this case, provided that they follow procedures which Google already has in place due to all it's other services, they are covered by the DMCA and similar legislation. All they have to do is to remove the content when the content owner notifies them that it's copied without a license and you fail to give a counter notice. There are very few jurisdictions nowadays where an online service is liable for the misbehaviour of their users provided that they react to notification of it.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (2, Informative)

TheSpoom (715771) | about 2 years ago | (#39797825)

They try to back up in the next paragraph, but it's clear they still get full permission to do anything (emphasis added):

The rights that you grant in this licence are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This licence continues even if you stop using our Services (for example, for a business listing that you have added to Google Maps).

As a professional web developer, I'm staying far, far away. God help you if you ever upload source code to a product they like.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (0)

geekoid (135745) | about 2 years ago | (#39798457)

You are stupid and alarmist. Exactly what I have come to expect from a 'web developer'.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (2)

dave420 (699308) | about 2 years ago | (#39800263)

You absolute muppet. They clearly state you retain all rights to your own intellectual property which you upload to Google. They can not take your code and use it. As a professional web developer, you can't read for shit.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39797999)

Way to cherry-pick. Quite literally, the very next sentence in the ToS reads:

"The rights that you grant in this licence are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This licence continues even if you stop using our Services (for example, for a business listing that you have added to Google Maps)."

What's even worse is this was the very next sentence in the article you quoted from.

Dishonest much?

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (1, Redundant)

dBLiSS (513375) | about 2 years ago | (#39798105)

It goes on to say.

"The rights that you grant in this licence are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This licence continues even if you stop using our Services (for example, for a business listing that you have added to Google Maps).”"

  stop with the trolling...

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (2)

robot256 (1635039) | about 2 years ago | (#39799335)

"Developing new services" could just as well mean making something to search everyone's personal files on the public Internet. "Promoting services" could mean plastering your family photos on the side of a bus. Even if Google doesn't do any of that, there is nothing stopping them from selling/bankrupting and someone else using the data under the same license. OP is not trolling.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39798127)

A "license" is legally defined as (1) a temporary exception, that is (2) revocable at any time.

Nothing in there says Google can directly monetize your IP.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (3, Funny)

dontmakemethink (1186169) | about 2 years ago | (#39798319)

Here's my terms:

Terms Of Service notifications are completely meaningless from corporate entities with absolutely no substantial liability for violating them. Go piss up a rope.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (-1, Redundant)

geekoid (135745) | about 2 years ago | (#39798381)

Maybe you shoudl be a,little more honest? IO notice you left out:

"The rights that you grant in this licence are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This licence continues even if you stop using our Services (for example, for a business listing that you have added to Google Maps).”

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (1)

swillden (191260) | about 2 years ago | (#39798745)

From http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/how-far-do-google-drives-terms-go-in-owning-your-files/75228 [zdnet.com]

Google Drive terms:

“Your Content in our Services: When you upload or otherwise submit content to our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide licence to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes that we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content

Dropbox's and Skydrive's terms are more sane.

Dropbox's, yes, Skydrive is basically the same. And, as another poster pointed out, if you read Google's whole ToS, it self-limits the purposes for which it can use that license to something more reasonable.

However, if you prefer to get different terms from Google, there's a really easy way to do it: Set up your own domain on Google Apps. According to this page [google.com] you then fall under the Apps Terms of Service [google.com], which are what Google offers to its business customers. Those terms say "what's yours is yours, what's ours is ours", with nothing about licensing.

Re:So they can own and track ALL your files? (3, Informative)

Local ID10T (790134) | about 2 years ago | (#39798961)

Dropbox's and Skydrive's terms are more sane.

Really? Read on...

Skydrive:

You understand that Microsoft may need, and you hereby grant Microsoft the right, to use, modify, adapt, reproduce, distribute, and display content posted on the service solely to the extent necessary to provide the service. ... In order to operate and provide the service, we collect certain information about you. As part of the service, we may also automatically upload information about your computer, your use of the service, and service performance. ... We may access or disclose information about you, including the content of your communications.

Dropbox:

We may need your permission to do things you ask us to do with your stuff, for example, hosting your files, or sharing them at your direction. This includes product features visible to you, for example, image thumbnails or document previews. It also includes design choices we make to technically administer our Services, for example, how we redundantly backup data to keep it safe. You give us the permissions we need to do those things solely to provide the Services. This permission also extends to trusted third parties we work with to provide the Services, for example Amazon, which provides our storage space.

Google:

Some of our Services allow you to submit content. You retain ownership of any intellectual property rights that you hold in that content. In short, what belongs to you stays yours.

Things could be better worded all around... but that's what you get when lawyers get involved.

One wonders why Slashdot chose this (1)

Overly Critical Guy (663429) | about 2 years ago | (#39802015)

The question is why Slashdot hasn't posted anything about that controversy but instead chose to post about Chrome OS, which nobody uses or cares about. In fact, there's been a lot of shady, selective coverage in the last 12 months that ignores stories that are huge on the rest of the web but happen to be negative toward entities that are popular among Slashdot commenters.

Multi-device (2)

vlm (69642) | about 2 years ago | (#39797593)

Stereotypical area of failure for networked home dirs is one user account can have more than one device.
I see it at home everyday with my AFS home directories and bizarre behavior when two machines logged in at the same time try to run awesome and firefox at the same time.
Not saying GOOG drive will/must fail this way, but I'm sure many GOOG-drive API using devs won't think of it and will find a way to fail, its the hardest problem not mentioned in the article.
On an optimistic note, I have a couple android devices now and they all live under the same google account perfectly.

Re:Multi-device (2)

goombah99 (560566) | about 2 years ago | (#39797643)

I had two computers running a mail program that synced with gmail. They each had scripts running that sorted the mail into folders slightly differently. I frequently would find 200 copies of the same message in the trash when I left both computers running.

Re:Multi-device (2)

kenaaker (774785) | about 2 years ago | (#39798157)

I've got a similar setup at home. I've got my basic OpenAFS home directory as a starting point, but I finally got things to work fairly well by a combination of a KDEHOME that points to a machine local filesystem and symlinks out of the networked directory to the machine local filesystem.

It seems like every release has another service that assumes every home directory is a local hard drive and everybody needs to run background services that can't properly share files in their home directories. (Like a "personal" copy of mysqld...)

Re:Multi-device (1)

swb (14022) | about 2 years ago | (#39798989)

I think the problem is that the "Home" directory concept was originally based around single-system access to the directory (ie, /usr/home/foo was accessed on a single machine) and where file locking, IPC and other similar mechanisms prevented multiple logins accessing mail from trashing files. The Wintel PC world's view of it has largely been as a private personal directory on shared storage, not generally as a user profile directory although MS kind of makes that work (for some definitions of roaming profiles..).

Once you had applications running and storing and updating settings in the "Home" directory, you kind of run into problems when you get into multiple system access without a common locking method.

still hasn't mastered the art of moving files (0, Troll)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 2 years ago | (#39797613)

That's okay. Neither has Windows. I mean, it can move them, but who knows where?

Re:still hasn't mastered the art of moving files (1)

poormanjoe (889634) | about 2 years ago | (#39797701)

That's okay. Neither has Windows. I mean, it can move them, but who knows where?

Use the right mouse button during drag-and-drop operations to receive the menu that gives you the option to MOVE or COPY.

Seems pretty simple to me.

Re:still hasn't mastered the art of moving files (1, Insightful)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 2 years ago | (#39798019)

'Windows cannot copy this file because another program is using it.'

Only you gotta guess which one muddafukka, or cancel the whole job and start over. If the damn thing has difficulty with one file, why can't it continue to copy all the others?

File management across all the filesystems is quite the mystery, and very archaic and primitive, needlessly thrashing the drive. So many simple options are completely absent.

And on top of that, some humorless twit calls me a troll.. Well!

Re:still hasn't mastered the art of moving files (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | about 2 years ago | (#39799351)

If the damn thing has difficulty with one file, why can't it continue to copy all the others?

Fixed with Windows 7.

Nice toy for teenagers... (4, Informative)

dryriver (1010635) | about 2 years ago | (#39797635)

I guess if you are in middle- or high-school, this could be a nice service for storing your homework and such. But if you are a business, or your files need to stay confidential for some other reason? I don't think Google Drive can be trusted with that kind of material. Even if it is encrypted or such. Just saying...

Re:Nice toy for teenagers... (2)

vlm (69642) | about 2 years ago | (#39797679)

I guess if you are in middle- or high-school, this could be a nice service for storing your homework and such.

Not really. You probably don't have the right to give GOOG permission to:

"publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content"

Re:Nice toy for teenagers... (2)

Urza9814 (883915) | about 2 years ago | (#39798331)

I guess if you are in middle- or high-school, this could be a nice service for storing your homework and such.

Not really. You probably don't have the right to give GOOG permission to:

"publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content"

Why? I dunno about you, but I never signed any contracts while in middle- or high-school restricting what I can and cannot do with my homework. Maybe you can't distribute the problems themselves, as they're probably copyright (though you could argue fair use for educational purposes and such,) but otherwise there's no reason you couldn't.

Hell, even in college I never signed such an agreement. Was asked to once and I refused, along with around a third of the class. SOP in those situations is to assign a different project that isn't free labor to some corporation. I know students who have sold their college (and, for that matter, highschool) projects with no problem.

Re:Nice toy for teenagers... (1)

vlm (69642) | about 2 years ago | (#39800217)

Under fair use exception for educational purposes I could quote most of, or maybe all of, your post, and there is very little you can do about it. As long as I avoid plagiarism by properly attributing your post to "Urza9814 (883915)" then I'm pretty much all good. Anyone can sue anyone for anything, but its really hard to win a lawsuit against a properly documented quote in an assigned school essay.

If I stored your post on GOOG-Drive and the Mighty GOOG decided to make a feature film out of your post, it seems I've given them permission to do so, but you have not, so things get weird.

Your very example of copyrighted math problems applies directly; think about it; I can copy them into my assigned math homework because of the educational exemption... the mighty GOOG is allowed under this license to grep everyones goog-drive and then sell a collection of copyrighted calculus homework problems... or is it, since I'm not the rights owner?

Re:Nice toy for teenagers... (1)

dave420 (699308) | about 2 years ago | (#39800323)

Stop cherry-picking parts of the ToS that appear to back up your claim. You missed out the part where they say what's yours remains yours. But as that would make your argument disappear, and stop you from being able to feel smug with yourself that you're better than Google, I doubt you'd have intentionally left that in there.

Re:Nice toy for teenagers... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39797947)

Hm. I would not use Google Drive, until there was a FUSE driver available for it. Once that was available, I would upload one or more LUKS containers which would contain my files. I'm pretty certain that the work required to break the crypto of one of those containers is not worth the knowledge that you'd get by inspecting the contents.

Oh, yeah. And, if Google can unlock your crypto, you need to remember to *not* upload the private key! (Tell your paymasters that you just got pwnd.)

Re:Nice toy for teenagers... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39799155)

It's called HIPPA. Maybe something related to the SEC? No matter what, any corporation sifting through you docs is way beyond knowing your web history.

Re:Nice toy for teenagers... (1)

DragonWriter (970822) | about 2 years ago | (#39801725)

I guess if you are in middle- or high-school, this could be a nice service for storing your homework and such. But if you are a business, or your files need to stay confidential for some other reason? I don't think Google Drive can be trusted with that kind of material.

If you are a business, Google probably expects you to use Drive through Google Apps which has a different set of assurances and terms of services (even in the free version.)

constant connectivity? (2)

OldGoatDJ (1497245) | about 2 years ago | (#39797769)

What if you are not connected to the internet constantly? does this make your device worthless? How does one work 'offline'?

Re:constant connectivity? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39797989)

What if you are not connected to the internet constantly? does this make your device worthless?

No.

How does one work 'offline'?

The contents of a local disk are synced to the online copy when the device in online. When offline, the device uses the local copy on local disk. When the device comes back online, the client and server work together to get back in sync. This is trivial, unless the same file is changed on both. The approach taken by CODA and Dropbox is to make an effort to choose correctly, but allow you to see previous versions of the file. This way can't lose data if the system makes a bad call.

This problem was solved in the 1980's. For example, by the CODA file system: http://www.coda.cs.cmu.edu/

This aspect of CODA was not even novel: VMS had an equivalent disconnected capability since early in its life.

FTFS: "your local drive is also Google Drive" (1)

DragonWriter (970822) | about 2 years ago | (#39798505)

What if you are not connected to the internet constantly? does this make your device worthless? How does one work 'offline'?

You use the locally-cached version of the files. That's what "your local drive is also Google Drive" means. It means that, just as with the Google Drive app for MacOS or Windows, your Google Drive has a local copy.

For apps, you use Chrome's app installation features to make offline-available web apps. So, both your files and the apps you use to work with them are available locally when disconnected, and synced with the cloud when a connection is available.

But... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39797873)

No Vertical Tabs = Chrome Sucks = Chrome OS sucks. /thread

Sorry your network connection was lost. (2)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about 2 years ago | (#39797933)

Your google laptop can't do anything..... not even access your files. This has happened just twice at home, but seems to happen a LOT at work and in hotels. I'd rather have local dh0: copies of my programs and files, so I can work while offline,

It is powerful, you don't think about it (4, Insightful)

Schiphol (1168667) | about 2 years ago | (#39798009)

"This makes it really powerful because you just don't think about it". This is a pretty good summary of the way in which companies such as Google make their profit. These days, it is quite essential to "think about it".

Re:It is powerful, you don't think about it (1)

SirGarlon (845873) | about 2 years ago | (#39798587)

Perhaps he meant to say, "This makes it really powerful (for us) IF you just don't think about it."

How revelatory (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39798077)

Actions like this reveal a lot about everyone involved.

1. Google is out of their bloody minds for putting such terms into their agreement. They're either incredibly evil (and arrogant enough to think they can get away with it) or incredibly stupid. Given what I've seen of their software development -- Google has a monopoly on software that's about 90% and is then never finished -- I'd guess they're just plain stupid.

2. The slashdot crowd and similar uber geeks see the problem and react with appropriate hostility and try to get their employers, friends, relatives, etc. to avoid using the service.

3. The overwhelming majority of people who know barely enough to turn on their computer and get to facebook will say, "Golly! This is neato! I can share all sorts of stuff with cousin Floyd!", and either not know about the hideous terms in the agreement or will hear about it from one of us and then ignore our advice.

4. Competitors will mostly be happy that Google will lower the privacy bar, yet again, making it even easier for them to do similar things.

A better idea (1, Insightful)

DrXym (126579) | about 2 years ago | (#39798171)

Dump chrome OS. Nobody cares about it. Fold the best bits into Android and bury the rest.

Re:A better idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39800657)

I care, I want to buy every person in my life who asks me for free tech support a Chromebook. It's the perfect indestructible OS / easily restorable thin client, and may be one of the best platforms for dodging malware (I'm on the fence about this last point still).

Posted from my CR-48 Chromebook.

Gee-whiz (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39798527)

So innovative of them.

Google Mainframe (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39798985)

It's like they're trying to take everyone back to the 70s.

I give it 10 more years before Google and friends completely neuter personal computing.

Maybe with PGP (2)

IwantToKeepAnon (411424) | about 2 years ago | (#39799711)

If there was a driver that would encrypt/decrypt the traffic en route then maybe I'd store stuff in the free version. Then I could share the key w/ my work PC or a co-worker or whoever I want to grant access to the files.

Google is brilliant at getting us to turn over information to them. If I store a file it is for MY use, not theirs. Especially if I have a paid account, then using the data to spam me w/ ads is even worse.

I already have G drive (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39799995)

I already have a G drive mapped on my Windows computer... How could I have two?!?!

Is this the same Sundar Pichai... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39801217)

...whose incompetence has resulted in the shutdown of the Atlanta engineering office?

Offline Mode (1)

Demoknight (66150) | about 2 years ago | (#39801783)

FYI - I was trying to get an answer on this one and found this reference. A Google gears Widget present in Chrome will synchronize your drive for offline viewing.
http://www.karthikk.net/2012/04/how-to-access-google-drive-without-internet-on-your-windows-or-mac-machine-google-drive-howto/

Although I'm still trying to figure out why I'm letting other people's insecurity affect my judgement on the purpose of cloud storage and the value of free.

Doubts (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39802113)

I don't know if I like having my hard drive linked to corporate mass-hard drive for "free". I don't trust it, no matter who it is.

Linux (1)

formfeed (703859) | about 2 years ago | (#39802525)

I guess that answers the speculations, whether you will be able to use Google Drive with Linux: Unless google brakes the openness of ChromeOS, yes.
And as long as they don't forbid crypt, that works for me

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...