<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why Won&#8217;t Google Let Us Move Our Search Data?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.conversionrater.com/2006/11/08/why-wont-google-let-us-move-our-search-data/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.conversionrater.com/2006/11/08/why-wont-google-let-us-move-our-search-data/</link>
	<description>A discussion of ecommerce, online advertising, Web 2.0, web entrepreneurship, and just making the web convert for your goals.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 16:18:50 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Pat McCarthy</title>
		<link>http://www.conversionrater.com/2006/11/08/why-wont-google-let-us-move-our-search-data/comment-page-1/#comment-27384</link>
		<dc:creator>Pat McCarthy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Nov 2006 20:12:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.conversionrater.com/index.php/2006/11/08/why-wont-google-let-us-move-our-search-data/#comment-27384</guid>
		<description>I think you are correct JoeG, however you&#039;re implying that I&#039;m saying we do have ownership.  My point was more that Google was skirting the issue by saying they&#039;ll get around to it when they can figure out how to do a trivial technical task.

I would have rather seen Schmidt say &quot;You use our service for free, we have rights to that data, so we don&#039;t feel we have to allow you to export it.&quot;  

That would have been a much more honest answer.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think you are correct JoeG, however you&#8217;re implying that I&#8217;m saying we do have ownership.  My point was more that Google was skirting the issue by saying they&#8217;ll get around to it when they can figure out how to do a trivial technical task.</p>
<p>I would have rather seen Schmidt say &#8220;You use our service for free, we have rights to that data, so we don&#8217;t feel we have to allow you to export it.&#8221;</p>
<p>That would have been a much more honest answer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JoeG</title>
		<link>http://www.conversionrater.com/2006/11/08/why-wont-google-let-us-move-our-search-data/comment-page-1/#comment-27383</link>
		<dc:creator>JoeG</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Nov 2006 20:06:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.conversionrater.com/index.php/2006/11/08/why-wont-google-let-us-move-our-search-data/#comment-27383</guid>
		<description>&quot;Well, Google profits from owning/holding our data, in fact many companies do.&quot; 

The implication of this statement is that we hold a clear right to the information our activities inherently create.  This isn&#039;t necessarily true.  I do believe strongly in our right to privacy - Google shouldn&#039;t be selling personally identifiable lists of all the querying people do - but I&#039;m not sure that idea can necessarily be extended to ownership.  You use Google&#039;s service which is a part of their infrastructure that they paid for - I think that gives them a pretty strong argument for ownership over the data left behind by people that use their service.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Well, Google profits from owning/holding our data, in fact many companies do.&#8221;</p>
<p>The implication of this statement is that we hold a clear right to the information our activities inherently create.  This isn&#8217;t necessarily true.  I do believe strongly in our right to privacy &#8211; Google shouldn&#8217;t be selling personally identifiable lists of all the querying people do &#8211; but I&#8217;m not sure that idea can necessarily be extended to ownership.  You use Google&#8217;s service which is a part of their infrastructure that they paid for &#8211; I think that gives them a pretty strong argument for ownership over the data left behind by people that use their service.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pat McCarthy</title>
		<link>http://www.conversionrater.com/2006/11/08/why-wont-google-let-us-move-our-search-data/comment-page-1/#comment-27362</link>
		<dc:creator>Pat McCarthy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Nov 2006 19:17:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.conversionrater.com/index.php/2006/11/08/why-wont-google-let-us-move-our-search-data/#comment-27362</guid>
		<description>Yeah John, and he actually followed that by saying something about &quot;making sure people were properly logged in to their accounts&quot;.  So I&#039;m pretty sure he was just meaning that you can only import your search data if you&#039;re logged in, which is obviously not a technical challenge at all.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah John, and he actually followed that by saying something about &#8220;making sure people were properly logged in to their accounts&#8221;.  So I&#8217;m pretty sure he was just meaning that you can only import your search data if you&#8217;re logged in, which is obviously not a technical challenge at all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John K</title>
		<link>http://www.conversionrater.com/2006/11/08/why-wont-google-let-us-move-our-search-data/comment-page-1/#comment-27359</link>
		<dc:creator>John K</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Nov 2006 19:13:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.conversionrater.com/index.php/2006/11/08/why-wont-google-let-us-move-our-search-data/#comment-27359</guid>
		<description>I wondered about that phrase too.  It could mean: &quot;As long as we can make sure people won&#039;t get unauthorized access&quot;, but according to your context, it has &quot;stall&quot; written all over it.

I don&#039;t think Google does many things that allow others to disintermediate Google.  And I think that&#039;s concious.  (Which is OK as a shareholder, but hard to square against the image of &quot;Don&#039;t be evil&quot;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wondered about that phrase too.  It could mean: &#8220;As long as we can make sure people won&#8217;t get unauthorized access&#8221;, but according to your context, it has &#8220;stall&#8221; written all over it.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think Google does many things that allow others to disintermediate Google.  And I think that&#8217;s concious.  (Which is OK as a shareholder, but hard to square against the image of &#8220;Don&#8217;t be evil&#8221;)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>