States question Google's privacy changes

Attorneys general from 36 states and territories wrote to Google CEO Larry Page on Wednesday to express concern over Google's planned changes to its privacy policies.

"Given all of our serious concerns, and given our obligation to protect consumers within our states, we request to meet with you as soon as possible to work toward a solution that will best protect the privacy needs of those who use Google’s products," the attorneys general wrote.

Beginning on March 1, Google will begin sharing user information across its various services. The change could mean that users will see ads in Gmail based on videos they watch on YouTube, for example.

"Our updated Privacy Policy will make our privacy practices easier to understand, and it reflects our desire to create a seamless experience for our signed-in users," a Google spokesman said. "We’ve undertaken the most extensive notification effort in Google’s history, and we’re continuing to offer choice and control over how people use our services services. Of course we are happy to discuss this approach with regulators globally."

But the attorneys general said the privacy update "appears to invade consumer privacy."

"Consumers have diverse interests and concerns, and may want the information in their Web History to be kept separate from the information they exchange via Gmail," they wrote.

The attorneys general argued that users of phones powered by Google's Android operating system might have little choice about opting out of the information-sharing.

"For these consumers, avoiding Google’s privacy policy change may mean buying an entirely new phone at great personal expense," the officials wrote.

The attorneys general also expressed concern that consolidating the personal information could make users more vulnerable to hacks. 

They said that if the changes really were positive for consumers, Google would offer the service as an "opt-in" feature.

"Unfortunately, Google has not only failed to provide an 'opt-in' option, but has failed to provide meaningful 'opt-out' options as well," they argued.

---