A critical analysis of Google's behavior towards its users in relation to the EU Data Protection Act and the US Safe Harbour Act

Table of Contents

1. Chapter one: Introduction

1.1 The rationale for this research

1.2 The aim and objectives of this research

1.3 Chapter overview

2. Chapter two: literature review

2.1 The internet

2.2 Data protection: Google is cumming under critcism

2.3 Privacy

3. Chapter three: methodology

3.1 Key concepts of research

3.1.1 Validity

3.1.2 Triangulation

3.1.3 Reliability

3.2 Research families

3.2.1 Qualitative and quantitative data

3.2.2 Primary data

3.2.3 Secondary data (Desk research)

3.3 Research Methods

3.3.1 Questionnaires

3.3.2 Experiments

3.3.3 Focus Groups

3.4 Ethical issues

4. Chapter four: analysis of primary and secondary research findings

4.1 Identification of reasons why Google is, despite criticism so popular

4.1.1 Google‘s story of success

4.1.2 Reasons for Google‘s success

4.1.3 General outcomes of the questionnaire

4.2 The relationship between how Google works with user sensitive data and in what way the company depends on these data

4.2.1 The dependence and use of data

4.2.2 The data Google collects

4.2.3 The legal side

4.3 Investigation of Google in terms of data privacy

4.3.1 Criticism on Google

4.3.2 Outcomes of the experiment

4.3.3 Analysis of the criticism about Google in relation to the legislation

4.4 Analysis of Google‘s customer awareness and behaviour

4.5 Recommendations for Google‘s customers to protect their data

5. Chapter five: conclusion

5.1 Review of research objectives

5.1.1 Objective one

5.1.2 Objective two

5.1.3 Objective three

5.1.4 Objective four

5.1.5 Objective five

5.2 Concluding remarks

Research Objectives & Topics

The primary aim of this research is to critically analyze Google's behavior regarding the handling of user-sensitive data in relation to the European Data Protection Act and the United States Safe Harbor Act, while simultaneously evaluating why Google remains highly popular among users despite significant privacy criticisms.

• Analysis of legal compliance with EU and US data protection frameworks.
• Examination of Google’s data collection practices and business dependencies.
• Assessment of user awareness regarding privacy risks and data misuse.
• Investigation into consumer loyalty and perceptions of the Google brand.
• Formulation of practical recommendations for improved user data protection.

Excerpt from the Book

Summary of Chapters

Chapter one: Introduction: This chapter outlines the rationale for researching Google's privacy practices, defines the research objectives, and provides a brief overview of the dissertation structure.

Chapter two: literature review: This section compiles existing academic perspectives and news criticism regarding Google, while establishing foundational concepts of privacy and data protection legislation.

Chapter three: methodology: The chapter justifies the chosen research strategies, including qualitative and quantitative methods, desk research, questionnaires, and experiments, while addressing the importance of validity and ethics.

Chapter four: analysis of primary and secondary research findings: This section presents the core analysis, evaluating why Google is successful despite privacy concerns, how the company utilizes user data, and the extent to which their practices align with legal frameworks.

Chapter five: conclusion: The final chapter reviews the fulfillment of the research objectives and provides concluding remarks on the ethical and legal implications of Google's behavior.

Keywords

Google, Data Protection Act, Safe Harbor Act, Privacy, Search Engine, User Awareness, Internet Security, Consumer Behavior, Data Collection, Online Advertising, Digital Privacy, Legislation, Electronic Frontier Foundation, User Experience, Data Misuse.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the primary focus of this dissertation?

The research focuses on a critical analysis of Google's behavior toward its users, specifically investigating how the company handles user-sensitive data and whether its practices infringe upon the European Data Protection Act and the United States Safe Harbor Act.

What are the central themes explored in this work?

The key themes include internet privacy, the legal compliance of search engine giants, the relationship between data collection and business models, and the gap between documented privacy concerns and actual user awareness.

What is the primary research question?

The research seeks to determine to what extent Google infringes upon international data protection laws and why the company maintains high levels of popularity despite frequent criticism from privacy advocates and institutions.

Which research methods were employed by the author?

The author utilized a mixed-methods approach, combining secondary desk research of legal texts and expert publications with primary field research, including questionnaires sent to users and a controlled experiment to assess information transparency.

What topics are covered in the main body of the research?

The main body covers Google's success story, the technical and business reliance on user data, an empirical experiment regarding individual data accessibility via search, and detailed analyses of specific legal conflicts such as Google Street View and Chinese search censorship.

Which keywords best characterize this research?

The core keywords are Google, Data Protection Act, Privacy, Consumer Behavior, and Digital Security.

How does the author define the relationship between Google and its users regarding data?

The research concludes that Google acts as an intermediary that leverages massive amounts of user data to facilitate advertising. The author emphasizes that Google relies on "turning a seeker into a purchaser" to sustain its business model.

What were the outcomes of the author's experiment regarding sensitive data?

The experiment demonstrated that it is relatively easy for any individual to find sensitive information about others through third-party websites linked by Google, though Google itself does not inherently "create" the privacy breach.

Did the author find evidence that Google is "evil"?

While acknowledging Google's "Don't be evil" motto, the author concludes that the company adheres to legal requirements in most instances, though they raise valid ethical questions about the scale of data monitoring and censorship practices.