[HN Gopher] An unwanted update to your Google Account
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       An unwanted update to your Google Account
        
       Author : olvy0
       Score  : 235 points
       Date   : 2021-06-19 14:29 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (roboleary.net)
 (TXT) w3m dump (roboleary.net)
        
       | axiosgunnar wrote:
       | The author is aware that his account ended up being associated
       | with Malaysia, right?
       | 
       | I have the impression he mistakenly thinks it stayed with
       | Germany?
        
         | eyeinthepyramid wrote:
         | Didn't he want it to stay with Germany?
        
           | andrewnicolalde wrote:
           | Yes, and it looks like it changed to Malaysia rather than
           | remaining in Germany.
        
         | wikunia wrote:
         | Yeah I'm also confused by that part. The first said Germany ->
         | Malaysia and the second said: Will be unchanged but Malaysia
        
           | masklinn wrote:
           | It looks like Google told the author to get bent, but it's
           | really rather unclear.
           | 
           | Though note that the dates may be confused: the article was
           | posted on May 1st but the edit is marked April 4th, for an
           | update to an article which would have been posted a month
           | later.
           | 
           | Most likely the date for the update is wrong and should be
           | something like June 4th, and in
           | 
           | > Which will happen first? The automatic switching of the
           | country association, or Google responding to my inquiry? It's
           | going to be a race!
           | 
           | the automatic switching won.
        
         | EMM_386 wrote:
         | > I have the impression he mistakenly thinks it stayed with
         | Germany?
         | 
         | I don't get that impression. I think the reason it's in bold
         | with is to show that even after the manual attempt to change
         | it, Google responded with "sorry, still Malaysia".
        
       | Little_John wrote:
       | hey everyone, Let's all hail from Uzbekistan!
        
       | encryptluks2 wrote:
       | Do you have Google One or a Workspace plan? I'd be curious if you
       | contact support from there if they are able to assist you. Last I
       | checked, Google One offers a free trial.
        
         | samat wrote:
         | I've contacted Google One support regarding youtube/google one
         | family account. They've said some things and I've tried some
         | things, nothing changed. Too big of an issue, I guess.
        
       | jfrunyon wrote:
       | > There is a disadvantage for me, because the privacy laws in
       | Europe are stronger than Asia, I lose some privacy protection.
       | 
       | You don't lose privacy protection by virtue of Google changing
       | your location. You lose privacy protection by not being a
       | resident of the jurisdiction with those laws.
        
         | developer93 wrote:
         | But if a company has you down as being in country x, how do
         | they know to apply the laws from country y? This is a practical
         | rather than legal point
        
           | compiler-guy wrote:
           | If the company has you down in country A, then they apply the
           | rules for country A. But there are many signs they use to
           | determine what country you are actually in.
           | 
           | Apparently there were enough signs in this case to conclude
           | he had been in Malaysia long enough to trigger the rule.
        
             | jmholla wrote:
             | There were also enough signs for them to identify Dan
             | Schroeder being from Thailand despite the fact he hasn't
             | been there or out of his country of residence for two
             | years.
        
               | compiler-guy wrote:
               | The argument isn't that the system is perfect. It likely
               | just needs to be good enough. A false positive in
               | attempting to comply with the law really isn't a reason
               | to not try at all.
        
       | daxuak wrote:
       | It's not mentioned in the article, but services could differ
       | between app stores if we head in this direction, not only for
       | privacy terms. For instance if China somehow get VPN apps off the
       | shelves from HK's app store and people there couldn't associate
       | their google accounts with regions other than HK, then that's a
       | root/switch OS or no VPN scenario for them. Same could happen to
       | Americans there - it's not based on citizenship or proof of
       | residence, google just decides. Ultimately one can argue that
       | even so it's not google's responsibility to fight against
       | authoritarians or whatever, but imho android already has a closed
       | eco system, this is getting worse.
        
       | fpgaminer wrote:
       | I got this email a week or two ago, but Google sent a follow up
       | email shortly thereafter clarifying that it was sent in mistake.
       | I'm curious, were only some of those emails sent by mistake? Or
       | were all of them? If the latter, perhaps the OP's concerns are
       | unfounded as of yet.
        
       | efitz wrote:
       | Why are you using Google if privacy is this much of a concern for
       | you?
       | 
       | There are many other services that provide much better privacy
       | protections, eg ProtonMail.
        
         | eingaeKaiy8ujie wrote:
         | It's not only about mail though. I don't use Gmail, but I still
         | need a Google account for my job to access our Drive, Calendar,
         | etc. I will delete it without hesitation once I don't need it.
        
         | nerbert wrote:
         | Spoiler alert: in 10 years a leak reveals that ProtonMail is
         | one of the multiple "Swiss-based privacy-oriented" services
         | operated by secret services.
        
           | dev_snd wrote:
           | Please don't spread FUD. Do you have any sources for your
           | accusations?
           | 
           | I believe that there are still honorable companies out there
           | (and I don't even use ProtonMail in particular)
        
           | rvba wrote:
           | NordVPN is pushed so hard everywhere that it looks like a
           | single point of failure - I assume every secret service wants
           | to hack it, if they didnt already.
        
             | ipaddr wrote:
             | I would have expected some sort of crackdown on popular
             | VPNs used by US citizens if they were as private as they
             | seemed or at least some polical action funded by right
             | holders.
             | 
             | We don't see this at all.
             | 
             | That tells me these services are compromised on some level.
             | 
             | A little while ago I noticed plenty of different VPN
             | providers. Many of the smaller ones were bought and private
             | labelled or had smear campaigns against them. Companies
             | compete so some of that is understood.. but the extent of
             | the attacks tells me players with powerful networks
             | (governmental,business or rogue) shut down many legitimate
             | smaller VPNs whike help promote others.
             | 
             | I would be wary of using any VPN if I expected privacy.
             | 
             | Rolling your own is easy enough but be careful where you
             | setup shop.
        
             | masklinn wrote:
             | It's ok, because now ExpressVPN is putting out ads
             | everywhere instead!
        
         | lrem wrote:
         | Disclaimer: I'm a Googler. These are my personal opinions.
         | 
         | Email is a small part of things I care about. Moreover, there's
         | snowflake's chance in hell I succeed at convincing every
         | correspondent to switch to e2e encryption and off services no
         | more trustworthy than Google or Microsoft. So, the technical
         | premise of ProtonMail doesn't help.
         | 
         | When it comes to Swiss privacy law... I'm already protected by
         | GDPR. Google is a juicy and politically convenient target for
         | most countries, so I'm not worried about its compliance. And
         | I'd rather stick to a company with a legal team equipped to
         | wrestle with government overreach.
         | 
         | Finally, I feel perfectly fine trusting Google to keep my
         | private things private. I keep copies of important documents in
         | Drive. Realistically, the highest risk vector for them leaking
         | is someone pwning my machine.
        
         | tyingq wrote:
         | I can see someone wanting something that the GDPR provides
         | them, while still wanting to use Google. "Right to be
         | forgotten", for example.
        
         | qwertox wrote:
         | Many others? I only know of ProtonMail. Then there's
         | mailbox.org and Posteo, but both are required to provide access
         | to the government [1]. Their only option is to provide end-to-
         | end encryption, like ProtonMail does.
         | 
         | I wouldn't trust any other email provider than one of those
         | three, if I would need to have truly secure emailing via a 3rd
         | party. But none are in a different position that Google, maybe
         | with exception of ProtonMail.
         | 
         | Which ones would you list?
         | 
         | [1]
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gesetz_zur_Beschr%C3%A4nkung_d...
        
           | ipaddr wrote:
           | I would only trust my own server and even then.
        
             | type0 wrote:
             | put it under your bed so that you could immediately notice
             | if anyone tries to access it while you asleep
        
         | izacus wrote:
         | Even ProtonMail needs to operate under Malaysian law for
         | Malaysian residents.
         | 
         | Being "private" doesn't magically make GDPR affect non-EU
         | residents.
        
       | Havoc wrote:
       | Anybody know where to see this setting. Been clicking around my
       | account for a while and can't see it (Not under personal info or
       | data & personalisation)
        
         | Guidii wrote:
         | Another thread mentioned:
         | https://policies.google.com/terms?authuser=
         | 
         | This gave me the TOS matched to the country that Google thinks
         | I'm in. (They're correct, in my case)
        
           | Havoc wrote:
           | That has me under US despite being in the UK. So that seems
           | to be the legal territory you fall under rather than
           | necessarily IP detected country
        
       | ajross wrote:
       | Well... is the author actually in Maylasia or Germany? I mean,
       | that matters. You don't get to personally choose whose laws
       | you're subject to, nor does Google. Having your Google settings
       | set to Germany does nothing to protect you from Maylay law, nor
       | Google for that matter.
       | 
       | If you don't want to be subject to the laws of the country you're
       | in[1] _you have to move_. Google can 't help you.
       | 
       | [1] Edit: I guess in this circumstance better phrased as "If you
       | want legal protections offered by a country you're not in..."
        
         | charles_f wrote:
         | Yup. Plus, beyond privacy there's the matter of taxes, both
         | paid by the consumer when purchasing but also paid
         | (sometimes...) by Google to the country of operations. So yeah,
         | you don't get to decide.
        
         | nulbyte wrote:
         | > You don't get to personally choose whose laws you're subject
         | to, nor does Google.
         | 
         | You could move, apply for and gain citizenship in another
         | country, or do other things to make these choices. But
         | contracts are even easier: Just pick a place. That's what a
         | choice of laws provision[0] is for.
         | 
         | [0]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choice_of_law_clause
        
         | masklinn wrote:
         | > Well... is the author actually in Maylasia or Germany?
         | 
         | It seems rather clear that the author is physically in
         | Malaysia.
         | 
         | > I mean, that matters.
         | 
         | Kinda but kinda not? If you're an american citizen and for some
         | reason go spend 6 months or a year in Malaysia, you probably
         | don't want your accounts to be switched over to Malaysia, and
         | possibly Malaysian, a language you probably do not speak.
        
           | ajross wrote:
           | Localization settings are distinct from location, they're
           | just defaults. You can read Google in German right here in
           | the US, etc...
           | 
           | The author was concerned about losing privacy protection
           | offered by Google to people in Germany as required by German
           | law. Which is nonsensical, because German law does nothing to
           | protect you _in Maylasia_.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | bellyfullofbac wrote:
             | Ah, obnoxious geo-IP-based defaults, rather than respecting
             | the browser's "Accept-Language" HTTP header.
             | 
             | I remember Google forums there were angry servicemen that
             | got Google in Arabic when they flew to Kuwait...
        
             | IX-103 wrote:
             | According to the EU, GDPR protections apply to EU citizens
             | wherever they are in the world...
        
               | izacus wrote:
               | That's wrong. According to EU, GDPR applies to EU
               | residents and the companies need to protect EU resident
               | privacy no matter which country they hail from.
        
               | spiddy wrote:
               | Doesn't this mean that US customs should comply with GDPR
               | when collecting data from EU citizens? I don't remember
               | being notified of my GDPR rights when entering US last
               | time. I suppose this boils down to enforceability.
        
               | [deleted]
        
             | axlee wrote:
             | I'm curious if he will then complain about not paying
             | Malaysian tax rates while living in Germany. You want to be
             | protected by the EU's privacy laws? Live in Europe, it's
             | that simple. Sure, he will find fewer dreamy beaches and
             | cheap food, but he can't have his cake and eat it too.
        
         | 3np wrote:
         | Specifically GDPR should hold if you're a resident regardless
         | of where you're physically located at an instance in time.
        
         | croes wrote:
         | What about Dan Schroeder? He wasn't even in Thailand at all.
        
           | flyinghamster wrote:
           | I'm wondering if a block of IP addresses got shifted from
           | Asia to Europe recently? That's about the only thing that
           | would make sense to me. But then again, ascribing sense to
           | secret-sauce algorithms and AIs probably isn't a good idea.
        
             | croes wrote:
             | Maybe VPN or Proxy servers
        
       | fchu wrote:
       | Google changing the country in their terms of services without
       | user explicit approval/opt-in is much worse than it seems.
       | 
       | As a user, I might have Germany as my country in Google while
       | living in Malaysia: maybe I like its privacy law better, or I'm a
       | German ambassador on a diplomatic mission, or a German citizen on
       | an exchange program, or a Malaysian citizen who signed up for
       | Google while on vacation in Germany and is now confused about
       | some parts of their account.
       | 
       | The point is, only the last scenario needs some fixing, while in
       | all other cases, the user will understandably prefer to keep the
       | country unchanged. Yet Google forcibly and preemptively switches
       | country in all these scenarios, with no real benefits to the
       | user.
       | 
       | But if there is no real benefit to the end user, and not everyone
       | wants this, why force this change in the first place? Something
       | technical that has to do with local laws.
       | 
       | And that's where it's really bad: - It's bad as a principle,
       | because if a person signs a contract with an entity under a
       | specific jurisdiction, that person doesn't expect the
       | jurisdiction to change unilaterally. - It's bad in practice,
       | because instead of knowing with certainty that my data is under a
       | specific jurisdiction, I'm now subject to some automated process
       | that could unilaterally move my data to a random country,
       | resulting in unintended exposure to its laws
        
       | Rapzid wrote:
       | This sorta crazy. If I were visiting China for a bit I wouldn't
       | expect to get a notice from my bank or Google that they have
       | transferred my accounts to a subsidiary subject to CCP control.
       | Next thing you know your blocked from leaving the country.
       | 
       | I'm curious to a few things that are absent from the post but a
       | lot of people in here are talking like they know the answers to:
       | 
       | A. How long this person was in Malaysia
       | 
       | B. What local laws they may have been in breach of or in jeopardy
       | of breaching(or Google)
       | 
       | C. What specific local rules/laws Google was attempting to comply
       | with in good faith(if any)
       | 
       | It's amazing how many people are jumping all over the OPs case
       | like they have this information. If this were a bank account
       | and/or China I don't think everybody would be giving the company
       | the benefit of the doubt and casting shade on the OP for raising
       | concerns...
        
         | anonu wrote:
         | Any international bank that wants regular access to US dollars
         | needs to play nice with the US Treasury. This means if you're a
         | US Bank account holder and live abroad, they want to know.
         | Similarly if you're a US citizen with a foreign bank account,
         | they want to know.
         | 
         | Not as onerous as transferring a bank account to another
         | entity, but the oversight is pretty extensive nonetheless.
        
       | floatingatoll wrote:
       | Can EU citizens living in Malaysia long-term exercise their GDPR
       | rights when Google decides that they reside in Malaysia?
        
         | StavrosK wrote:
         | No, because the GDPR doesn't apply to citizens, but to
         | companies. It only applies to companies that target the EU for
         | their services:
         | 
         | https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-topic/data-protection/refo...
        
           | floatingatoll wrote:
           | That is technically correct, but ultimately unhelpful in the
           | context of the post. I've rewritten my question to address
           | your objections to my phrasing.
           | 
           | Is Google required to comply with GDPR data and deletion
           | requests made by EU citizens that Google has deemed to be be
           | residing in Malaysia?
           | 
           | Since you're familiar with GDPR, I would appreciate your
           | opinion on it.
        
             | izacus wrote:
             | No, GDPR explicitly speaks about EU residents and not
             | citizens. Which means that OP is not covered, but an
             | American living in France is.
        
               | floatingatoll wrote:
               | Alright. I'm glad I asked, even if my phrasing sucked,
               | because it uncovers why they're doing this.
        
           | croes wrote:
           | That's clever by google. Because if a german citizen uses
           | european google services, he is GDPR protected no matter
           | where he is.
           | 
           | That switch made im a EU citizens living abroad using non-EU
           | services, so no GDPR protection.
           | 
           | Coincidence?
        
             | StavrosK wrote:
             | Again, the GDPR applies to EU _residents_ , not _citizens_.
             | A German citizen in the US isn 't protected by the GDPR.
             | 
             | Technically, it doesn't even apply to citizens, but to
             | countries that the company markets to. The link explains
             | all this.
        
               | croes wrote:
               | It's not so simple. A German citizen in the US is
               | protected by the GDPR if he uses a EU company's service,
               | even a US citizen in the US is then protected by GDPR.
               | 
               | Here it is the same, if he uses EU Google he is
               | protected, because of the switch to Google Malaysia he
               | isn't anymore.
        
               | StavrosK wrote:
               | I disagree, even EU companies don't have to adhere to the
               | GDPR if they don't target EU countries. Google doesn't
               | have to adhere to the GDPR for people in the US, whether
               | they're EU citizens or not.
        
               | germanier wrote:
               | Companies have to, see Article 3. GDPR triggers whenever
               | the processing is done by a company located in the EU or
               | targeting users located in the EU.
               | 
               | Google probably does not as they surely don't do
               | processing of non-EU user's data within their EU
               | subsidiaries.
        
         | jiveturkey wrote:
         | It's irrelevant where Google decides they reside. It only
         | matters where they _actually_ reside. Your question is a fair
         | one, but it 's pretty thin and is therefore trivially answered
         | by a Google search.
         | 
         | https://www.compliancejunction.com/does-gdpr-apply-to-eu-cit...
         | 
         | > When an individual leaves an EU country and goes to a non-EU
         | country, they are no longer safeguarded by GDPR.
        
       | Macha wrote:
       | I got a similar notification recently that my account was updated
       | from being associated with "unknown" to Ireland, which was
       | interesting.
        
       | blfr wrote:
       | _There is a disadvantage for me, because the privacy laws in
       | Europe are stronger than Asia, I lose some privacy protection. Is
       | this a coincidence?_
       | 
       | Maybe not but some of my accounts have been associated with
       | European Google entities so it works both ways. It seems that
       | they're simply sorting by IP from which you most often access it
       | since consistent use of proxies resulted in predictable country
       | association.
        
       | tangy_fluid wrote:
       | This is outrageous and attacks like this aren't going to stop
       | until we start putting CEOs in prison.
        
       | inigojonesguy wrote:
       | My google account is associated with Switzerland, which is not in
       | EU, although I am in Romania, which is in EU. I never received
       | such a message from google.
        
       | superkuh wrote:
       | It's even worse if you don't enable javascript. Suddenly most
       | google services will be in another language (not english) and
       | there's nothing you can do about it. My google account regularly
       | gets switched to Taiwan, Hong Kong, etc because lots of people
       | from those countries use the same (canadian) VPS provider as me
       | to tunnel though.
        
         | anoncake wrote:
         | If only there was some sort of Accept-Language header.
        
           | ryandrake wrote:
           | Don't get me started! Every time I travel somewhere, Google
           | and a bunch of other web sites just decide on their own to
           | send me web content in the local language. Why?? Just respect
           | the user agent's Accept-Language header. That's the whole
           | purpose of it!
        
             | mavhc wrote:
             | Because 99.999% of people don't know what that is.
        
               | anoncake wrote:
               | No, because browser makers don't expose it appropriately.
               | There aren't any real alternatives: The only way to
               | determine the user's language preference that can
               | actually work is for them to provide it.
        
               | Semaphor wrote:
               | What would be appropriate?
               | 
               | Firefox has it under "Choose your preferred language for
               | displaying pages" which seems appropriate to me.
        
               | marcosdumay wrote:
               | More importantly, Firefox defaults to the language of the
               | browser you choose to install.
               | 
               | I haven't seen anybody install software on the wrong
               | language by mistake for a long time.
        
               | anoncake wrote:
               | Somewhere more prominent, in the main UI. The user may
               | want to see different pages in different languages (e.g.
               | to avoid garbage translations). Or perhaps explicitly ask
               | the user.
        
               | mavhc wrote:
               | Again, 99% of people want the default language, annoying
               | them isn't helpful, nor is adding 100 more menu options
        
               | squiggleblaz wrote:
               | I think that's true however you slice it. There's lots of
               | possibilities for defining the default: but the language
               | the user has chosen to use for their system is vastly
               | more likely to be right than a best guess.
               | 
               | The other one is: pick to one language and stick to it.
               | If the page I'm reading is in some European language,
               | please show the GDPR messages in that European language
               | not some other language. If it's a French blogspot blog
               | being visited by a user in Germany, show the messages in
               | French! This is almost guaranteed to be 100% reliable.
               | It's not like Google is ignorant of the language of the
               | page. (I can understand not having GDPR messages
               | translated into say Indonesian. But if you do, then again
               | - match the language of the page.)
        
               | pingiun wrote:
               | That's why there's a browser setting that handles this
               | for you
        
       | karaterobot wrote:
       | If he lives in Germany, and they mistakenly changed his location
       | to Malaysia, I understand his complaint. But, you can't just say
       | "I want you to treat me as though I lived in a different country
       | than I do, because I prefer their laws on this particular
       | subject".
       | 
       | Granted, I wish Google's approach to privacy was better all
       | around, but given that they want to gobble up as much data as
       | possible, and we all know about that by now, I am not as confused
       | by their approach here as I am by the author's reaction.
        
         | Skunkleton wrote:
         | Many laws apply to citizens of a country, no matter where they
         | are. Is GDPR applicable to EU citizens regardless of where they
         | happen to be?
        
           | isbvhodnvemrwvn wrote:
           | No, it only applies to residents of the EU: https://gdpr-
           | info.eu/art-3-gdpr/
        
         | codegladiator wrote:
         | > you can't just say "I want you to treat me as though I lived
         | in a different country than I do, because I prefer their laws
         | on this particular subject
         | 
         | why not ?
        
           | anonymousab wrote:
           | Because the laws of the country you are in dictate how Google
           | must treat you as a customer or user, and not your preference
           | of how you'd like them to treat you.
        
             | ISL wrote:
             | There is a subtlety here, due to Google's scale.
             | 
             | If I sign up with a small company based in, say, Chile, all
             | of my information is likely to be stored there or at least
             | governed by Chile's laws no matter where I am in the world.
             | 
             | The author of this article appears to have engaged with
             | Google on the terms presented in Germany but is accessing
             | Google services from Malaysia. The difference is that
             | Google has a more-substantial presence in Malaysia and is
             | hence more-beholden to Malaysia's laws. Our hero's ability
             | to choose to interact with a first-class service while
             | being treated as a German while abroad has been
             | substantially degraded.
        
       | chrismorgan wrote:
       | I just took a look at this for my own account. It has me
       | associated with India; I'm Australian, but spent just over a year
       | in India recently. I have never received any notification like
       | the one cited in this article. (Perhaps because it wouldn't
       | affect which company service is offered through? But the laws may
       | still differ.)
       | 
       | And as far as Google Play Store is concerned, I'm American for
       | some completely unknown reason, and they refuse to be convinced
       | otherwise unless I give them credit card details; so any apps
       | region-locked to Australia are out of my reach.
        
         | lokedhs wrote:
         | I was curious what country Google associates with me, and this
         | is what I see:
         | 
         | As shown in Google's Terms of Service, your account is
         | associated with the following country: .
         | 
         | It seems there are things Google don't know about me, even
         | though I'm not making this information secret.
        
           | chrismorgan wrote:
           | Same for me, but they say "As shown in Google's Terms of
           | Service", and that link
           | https://policies.google.com/terms?authuser= does show the
           | country (see and possibly click on the text "Country
           | version").
        
         | ipaddr wrote:
         | How many apps get region locked to Australia?
        
           | xyzzy_plugh wrote:
           | I'm not in Australia, but many other countries have region
           | locked local apps. In my experience banking is a big problem,
           | though it seems to have improved in the last few years.
           | 
           | Local TV providers still use region-locked apps for streaming
           | services.
        
             | mikelward wrote:
             | Mobile phone companies is another one. Installing the
             | Vodafone app was (maybe still is) impossible in many
             | countries if you're not a local.
        
           | AnssiH wrote:
           | In addition to what siblings said: taxi apps, parking apps,
           | food delivery apps, package delivery apps are sometimes
           | region locked. I'm not in Australia, though.
        
       | johnvaluk wrote:
       | Location has has become a huge thorn in Google's side in a number
       | of areas:
       | 
       | - Geographical location of data (Data regions) for Google
       | Workspace
       | 
       | - Culpable deniability about a user's location when anonymously
       | accessing Google Maps
       | 
       | - Compliance with local laws where the user is physically located
       | when accessing a service
       | 
       | - Region locked applications
       | 
       | - Financial/banking restrictions
       | 
       | I'm sure there are more. Google is justifiably concerned about
       | compliance and liability. That's the incentive for these changes,
       | not improving the user experience.
        
       | paulgdp wrote:
       | I've never received such an email, but I recently moved to many
       | different countries (many months each), how can I check to which
       | country my account is attached to?
        
       | laborat wrote:
       | I was under the impression that the EU privacy laws (GDPR etc)
       | applied to EU citizens regardless of location. If that impression
       | is correct, then isn't it the case that nothing meaningful,
       | privacy-wise, will change for the author even after this change
       | to their account, as long as they remain a German citizen?
        
         | chki wrote:
         | No, that's not correct. As an EU citizen living abroad, using
         | non-EU based services, the GDPR will not apply. It would also
         | be impossible to enforce something like that.
        
           | ipaddr wrote:
           | The GDPR does apply to non-EU based services but no
           | enforcement is possible.
           | 
           | So it doesn't matter where you live if the service is out of
           | reach of this law.
        
             | chki wrote:
             | >The GDPR does apply to non-EU based services
             | 
             | That's only correct with regards to the processing of data
             | subjects who are in the European Union. See Art. 3.2 of the
             | GDPR.
        
               | type0 wrote:
               | Here's how Madison.com handles this:
               | 
               | "451: Unavailable due to legal reasons
               | 
               | We recognize you are attempting to access this website
               | from a country belonging to the European Economic Area
               | (EEA) including the EU which enforces the General Data
               | Protection Regulation (GDPR) and therefore access cannot
               | be granted at this time. For any issues, contact ..."
        
       | twirlock wrote:
       | >the privacy laws in Europe are stronger than Asia, I lose some
       | privacy protection. Is this a coincidence?
       | 
       | Of course it's not.
        
       | Aulig wrote:
       | > There is a disadvantage for me, because the privacy laws in
       | Europe are stronger than Asia, I lose some privacy protection. Is
       | this a coincidence?
       | 
       | It is a coincidence, I recently had my account changed from
       | Australia to Germany. Seems to simply depend on your IP, as I
       | don't have any payment methods associated as speculated in
       | another comment.
        
       | Jaygles wrote:
       | I understand the author's frustration. But until someone finds
       | out how a company that operates globally can satisfy the laws of
       | the countries their customers are located in without associating
       | the accounts with a country, I'm not sure what we can do.
       | 
       | > What I find curious is that it says the services are
       | essentially the same between different countries. So, there is no
       | advantage to me as a consumer for anything to change.
       | 
       | The advantage to the consumer is that they have access to the
       | services at all. Countries have the ability to completely cut off
       | their citizens to a service if they don't follow their laws.
        
         | dredmorbius wrote:
         | Google wishes to enjoy the investment, employment, legal, and
         | cultural benefits of being physically located in the United
         | States for its key operations, but wishes to associate itself
         | with Ireland, the Netherlands, and Bermuda for tax purposes.
         | 
         | Why shouldn't its users seek similar geographic arbitrage?
        
           | remus wrote:
           | Because Google has to satisfy the legal requirements of the
           | country the user is actually in.
        
             | southerntofu wrote:
             | No, they only have to satisfy the legal requirements of
             | countries where they have established organizations. That's
             | why GDPR was a game-changer: it made Europe-wide strong
             | privacy regulations that were previously local to a few
             | countries. France's CNIL has always been a farce, but at
             | least on paper provided privacy rights... that Google was
             | free to ignore because it was based in Ireland & such.
             | 
             | Of course as an Internet service you don't have to comply
             | with every single national law there is. Would that even be
             | possible? Of course, if a nation State believes you don't
             | respect their laws, they are "free" to try and censor your
             | website, as many do with The Pirate Bay, Sci Hub, etc.
        
         | croes wrote:
         | BTW companies like Paypal enforced US boycotts on cuba even if
         | the customer is a EU citizens.
         | 
         | "The ticket retailer Proticket, for example, filed a lawsuit
         | against the blocking of its account after offering tickets for
         | the musical "Soy de Cuba" and the concert of a Cuban artist.
         | Although Proticket won its case at the Dortmund Regional Court
         | in spring 2016, Paypal still did not change its approach."
        
           | monkeybutton wrote:
           | Doesn't the law block PayPal from being involved in such a
           | transaction?
        
             | croes wrote:
             | Not the EU branch. Global boycott laws, like US ones, are
             | forbidden.
        
               | cptskippy wrote:
               | PayPal LU, the bank that makes PayPal EU possible is a
               | Subsidiary of PayPal Holdings Incorporated in the US.
               | 
               | > All US persons, including US-incorporated entities,
               | their foreign branches (including non-US entities owned
               | or controlled by a US person that are also subject to US
               | sanctions with respect to certain sanctions programs,
               | such as the US's Iran, Cuba, and North Korea sanctions
               | programs) and employees, are prohibited from transacting
               | with sanctioned parties.
               | 
               | - https://insightplus.bakermckenzie.com/bm/compliance-
               | investig...
               | 
               | I am pretty sure the EU and US have treaties requiring
               | them to respect one another's sanctions.
        
               | croes wrote:
               | Paypal has already lost in german court. And global
               | sanctions are still invalid. Paypal explicitly violates
               | applicable EU law, namely the EU Blocking Regulation.
               | This EU directive was explicitly issued in response to
               | the US embargo against Cuba. It prohibits European
               | companies from complying with the embargo and threatens
               | all those who engage in the US blockade with severe
               | penalties. And PayPal (Europe) S.a r.l. & Cie, S.C.A. is
               | a european company.
        
             | pstrateman wrote:
             | Anybody that wants to interact with the US banking system
             | must enforce US sanctions.
             | 
             | Pretty sure PayPal EU wants to be able to send money to
             | people in the US.
        
         | nerdponx wrote:
         | I don't mind sharing my country of residence, of all things.
        
         | 988747 wrote:
         | I live in Europe, but past few years I've been working for US-
         | based company, using their VPN a lot. Google wants to associate
         | me with USA instead of my home country, and when I tried to
         | fill support request to correct them their answer was basically
         | "shut up, we know better".
         | 
         | I created another mailbox and am slowly migrating to it. Fuck
         | you Google.
        
           | bartvk wrote:
           | If you are migrating anyway, think about getting your own
           | domain and migrate to that.
        
             | 988747 wrote:
             | That's exactly what i did - for now I'm hosting it on OVH
             | with their "Professional Email" service, which looks a lot
             | like Outlook.
        
               | mkr-hn wrote:
               | Fastmail is good if you look for other options later. My
               | referral link will give you 10% off:
               | https://ref.fm/u25202288
               | 
               | It's Australia-based, so any weird regulation differences
               | you run into will at least be new and exciting compared
               | to what you dealt with at a US-based company.
        
         | croes wrote:
         | And how does google satisfy a countries laws if they associate
         | a customer with the wrong country?
        
           | reaperducer wrote:
           | Unlike computer code, laws tend to have wiggle room. IANAL,
           | but I expect in this case "best effort" is good enough.
        
             | croes wrote:
             | How but just asking your customer instead of guessing by
             | unreliable factors?
        
               | seoaeu wrote:
               | Is there any reason to believe that asking would be
               | remotely reliable? There's a reason that liquor stores
               | don't just ask people whether they're over 21.
        
               | alexeldeib wrote:
               | Yet, online that's all websites 18+ and 21+ do.
        
               | croes wrote:
               | Does the liquor store estimate your age or do they ask
               | for your id? Google should ask and then could demand
               | proof.
        
               | compiler-guy wrote:
               | If they had asked the OP, he would have told them
               | Germany, not Thailand, so they likely would not be in
               | compliance with the law.
        
               | croes wrote:
               | They could demand proof of residency, that's the correct
               | way.
        
           | ac29 wrote:
           | In this article, Google wasn't incorrect though - this person
           | just wanted the rules for a country they werent in to apply
           | instead of local rules. Google made a good faith attempt to
           | comply with local rules for this customer based on the
           | (correct) location data they had.
        
             | Rapzid wrote:
             | I'm curious if you have sources as to:
             | 
             | A. How long this person was in Malaysia
             | 
             | B. What local laws they may have been in breach of or in
             | jeopardy of breaching(or Google)
             | 
             | C. What specific local rules/laws Google was attempting to
             | comply with in good faith(if any)
        
             | croes wrote:
             | What about Dan Schroeder? Associated with Thailand, never
             | been to Thailand, didn't travel for 2 years.
        
             | croes wrote:
             | I still wonder if they changed the currency and the prices
             | in the store accordingly or if he still had to pay european
             | prices.
        
         | twirlock wrote:
         | The issue of contention is how they determine the country,
         | apparently even as the user in question is contesting. i.e.
         | your comment is an irrelevant deflection that adds nothing to
         | the discussion, and you are functionally doing PR for Google
         | for free.
        
         | ketamine__ wrote:
         | If someone rents an Airbnb for a few months in a new location
         | are they now a resident of that new location? If we aren't
         | talking about residency then changing an association (whatever
         | that means) seems arbitrary.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | CydeWeys wrote:
           | Probably, yeah. You could say it's _temporary_ residency or
           | whatever, but by the several months point this is clearly
           | more than a mere vacation. If you 've been living in one
           | place for several months now you more live there than
           | anywhere else.
        
           | jsnell wrote:
           | Why do you think this is a matter of a few months? All we
           | know is that the author hasn't traveled "recently".
           | 
           | But yes, those kinds of thresholds are common when it comes
           | to residency as an official concept for e.g. taxation.
           | Usually the threshold is around 183 days, but there is no
           | reason why it'd be obviously less arbitrary than other
           | choices.
        
             | _nalply wrote:
             | Where do you have this strange number from? The
             | factorization is 3 * 61.
        
               | Wingy wrote:
               | It's 365 / 2, ~half of a year :)
        
               | __zack wrote:
               | It's just over half a year
        
               | cldellow wrote:
               | As others have said, it's half of a year.
               | 
               | But most importantly, it's the number that the US
               | government uses on form 8840, the Closer Connection
               | Exception Statement for Aliens:
               | https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f8840.pdf
        
               | [deleted]
        
           | lbotos wrote:
           | Actually, in many countries, yes, a "tax resident".
           | 
           | For the UK it's 31 days of more than 3 hours of work. I think
           | it's the same for the US.
        
             | 692 wrote:
             | it's bit more complex than that (I've suffered regarding
             | this)
             | 
             | The Automatic Overseas Test
             | 
             | You would normally be considered a non-UK resident if you
             | meet any one of the following elements of the Automatic
             | Overseas Test:                   You were considered as a
             | UK resident in one or more of the previous three tax years,
             | but you spend fewer than 16 days in the UK in the current
             | tax year         You spend fewer than 46 days in the UK in
             | the tax year AND you were non-UK resident in the preceding
             | three tax years         You work full time outside the UK
             | and spend fewer than 91 days in the UK and you work fewer
             | than 31 days in the UK for three hours or less in any given
             | day.
        
               | lbotos wrote:
               | You're right, I shortcutted it. I've read this page so
               | many times and just jumped to the "hyper conservative
               | take".
        
           | judge2020 wrote:
           | Regardless, google might have to follow privacy laws of
           | countries even if you set foot there for a layover or for
           | only a few hours - google itself isn't a country and thus
           | other countries can effectively bully them into doing
           | anything if Google wants to stay in business there. Not a
           | problem for random island nations that have few citizens, but
           | you can bet any sizable nation blacklisting them could mean
           | an appreciable loss in revenue (and maybe triggering other
           | countries to make similar demands).
        
           | jfrunyon wrote:
           | We clearly are, in fact, talking about residency.
           | 
           | > As someone who travels a lot (not recently!)
        
         | remram wrote:
         | Yes I find it weird that they both resent having local laws
         | apply (when it's Malaysia) but value being covered by GDPR
         | (when it's Germany). I can't really understand what they are
         | wishing for.
        
           | croes wrote:
           | Both are german citizens and both are not in the country to
           | which they are now to be assigned. The latter wasn't even in
           | Thailand at all. So I guess they just don't want that Google
           | makes some bullshit associations for them which undermie the
           | GDPR.
        
             | rsj_hn wrote:
             | So you are saying if a German citizen travels to Mexico,
             | they don't need to obey Mexican law because they are German
             | citizens?
             | 
             | Suppose a law in Mexico requires Google to store search
             | queries and make them available to the government for 1
             | year, or it requires the collection of certain types of
             | personal information, and a law in Germany bans Google from
             | storing search queries or collecting the information. Now a
             | German citizen travels to Mexico, and does a web query in
             | Mexico, do you think Google should apply Germany's Laws or
             | Mexico's laws? It will apply Mexico's laws because that is
             | the jurisdiction in which the query is made. Similarly if a
             | Mexican travels to Germany and makes a query, then Google
             | will not store the results.
             | 
             | Btw, this is the whole point of international VPNs. People
             | want an internet presence in different countries in order
             | to access content that is not available in their own
             | country or to be treated differently than if they were in
             | their own countries. So if you, as the German traveller,
             | don't want your query stored, you'd VPN to a server in
             | Germany and run your queries through that VPN. If you ran
             | your query through the Mexican ISP, you can be sure that
             | the information would be collected.
             | 
             | Thus as much as European governments may want the GDPR to
             | be a type of shield that you can carry with you when you
             | cross over to other jurisdictions, the reality of that
             | portability is limited to the ability of European nations
             | to convince other nations to go along and treat Europeans
             | differently in their own legal system. It may work, it may
             | not, but whether it works is not a question of the GDPR but
             | of the ability of Europe to project power and override laws
             | in other jurisdictions.
        
               | 3836293648 wrote:
               | You can't go somewhere and expect their laws to not apply
               | to you. You can absolutely go somewhere and still have
               | the laws of your home apply to you, even if they won't be
               | enforced till you get home.
               | 
               | A implies B does not mean B implies A
        
               | rsj_hn wrote:
               | This why I gave the example of two contradictory laws.
               | Only one can apply.
        
               | croes wrote:
               | A european citizen using a european company's service is
               | under european law.
        
       | martini333 wrote:
       | Meta: this site does not work on 4k monitor. Some weird relative
       | sizes
        
         | ipaddr wrote:
         | What browser are you using? Don't say safari...
        
       | anonu wrote:
       | Most people don't pay a penny for Google services. This may be an
       | unpopular opinion: if you're going to complain - dont use their
       | service.
        
       | jeffbee wrote:
       | The author doesn't seem to say which is correct. Are the facts of
       | the matter irrelevant here?
        
       | tomxor wrote:
       | Lets be honest.. it's not "your account" it's "their account".
       | 
       | It's not just Google, this is the modern web. If you use a web
       | based service I think it's better to assume everything you give
       | them is theirs, otherwise it's an impossible battle of constantly
       | reviewing massive ToS changes and a mutating product/features. I
       | guess this view probably sounds a little out of touch but it's
       | easier if you don't use a smart phone.
        
         | tomxor wrote:
         | wow, what's going on here? Is google now a sensitive subject?
        
           | EricE wrote:
           | No, just people who don't like inconvenient facts.
           | 
           | One of my favorite stickers: "There is no cloud, just someone
           | else's computer"
           | 
           | Techies hate it when you point crap like that out - because
           | it re-enforces that trust, reputation, creditability,
           | character - all those things matter. And most tech companies
           | have damn little of any of those :p
        
       | compiler-guy wrote:
       | This problem is just a specific instance of the more general
       | "expat problem". When you move countries, you have to deal with
       | the new country's rules. Many people who move countries run into
       | unexpected differences. You have to roll with it and deal.
        
       | Brajeshwar wrote:
       | Oh! I'd love to be able to change the country of my Google Apps
       | for Domains. I have tried few times, whenever I remember but gave
       | up.
       | 
       | Why do I want to change?
       | 
       | When I signed up, the currency was USD and perhaps the country
       | stayed USA too! There was no Indian pricing at that time (I think
       | over a decade ago). For the US pricing, I pay $30 monthly for a
       | 5-member plan. I want to leverage the Indian pricing of [?]125
       | (~$1.6) per account per month.
        
       | waych wrote:
       | Xoogler here.
       | 
       | The way I remember this working is that it is entirely dependent
       | on the methods of payment (MOP) associated with your account. If
       | you remove MOPs from country A, and then 30 days later you add a
       | MOP from country B, your underlying gaia account will have the
       | home country migrated (affects play store, etc).
       | 
       | The workaround is to use different accounts, each with MOP from
       | different countries. Pretty sure IP doesn't matter.
       | 
       | Regarding which legal jurisdictions apply between you and a
       | company like Google? Well, the courts are probably not going to
       | consider what it says in your account profile.
        
         | dpwm wrote:
         | Never worked at google, but I use their services and moved
         | country recently.
         | 
         | > The workaround is to use different accounts, each with MOP
         | from different countries. Pretty sure IP doesn't matter.
         | 
         | Maybe it has changed, because this was not my experience: my
         | methods of payments have all remained the same. It appears to
         | be based on IP, because my transition was delayed compared to
         | family members who moved with me because I had VPNed back to
         | the country I had left. I'm pretty sure it was IP based,
         | because the relative delay approximately correlated with how
         | many days I'd used the VPN for.
        
           | waych wrote:
           | Managing Terms of Service at scale is actually a real problem
           | companies like Google face, so yeah it's entirely possible
           | the country tracking for Terms of Service (TOS) is completely
           | distinct from the MOP country association in Pay & Play.
        
         | izacus wrote:
         | This seems to have been changed lately - Google account will
         | switch it's location (but not language) by itself if it detects
         | you're in a certain country for a long time. Happened to some
         | people I know as well.
        
           | [deleted]
        
       | elcano wrote:
       | Google services between Germany and Malaysia might be essentially
       | the same. But that might not be the case if Google decides to
       | relocate you out of the United States. Even those US Citizens who
       | live in a USA territory like Puerto Rico or US Virgin Islands
       | constantly receive a variant of the message 'this service is not
       | available in your country'. Be aware that as a US territory,
       | Puerto Rico and USVI are subject to the same federal laws (and
       | financial system) as any other state, so technically they aren't
       | foreign/alien. But a private company like Google can choose to
       | underserve what is not strategic for them. Google uses either
       | your IP address or the postal address of your payment method to
       | find out that you don't live in the 50 states (or DC). When
       | launching some services, Google starts in US (or course),
       | excluding their territories. Then they expand to other countries,
       | again skipping the United States territories, which continue
       | receiving the 'this service is not available in your country'
       | message' practically forever. This happened with Google Music.
       | Also YouTube videos apparently market for USA market only were
       | not playable here. Google controls the YouTube platform and
       | there's no excuse for not negotiating including all the US
       | territories in the definition of USA for YouTube uploaders.
       | 
       | Recently they made YouTube Premium available in this market. And
       | with the YouTube Music change, this also came included. However,
       | I don't know if they fixed completely fixed the issue of viewing
       | USA only videos from here.
        
       | croes wrote:
       | What if I just use VPN of a foreign country?
       | 
       | If they switch the country, did you get the prices of the new
       | country or do you have to pay the prices of the original country
       | association?
       | 
       | Isn't it a violation of privacy to track the user in that way?
       | 
       | Would it not be the correct way to ask for prove, that he resides
       | in Germany and not simply switch the country?
        
       | growt wrote:
       | So what would happen if someone moved to another country, used a
       | VPN to fool IP based geolocation and disabled Google location
       | history etc. Would there still be a (legal) way for Google to
       | change their country?
        
       | Little_John wrote:
       | Hey everyone Let's all hail from Uzbekistan!
        
       | contriban wrote:
       | The hilarious part is that I got this email maybe last week,
       | moving my account to country X. Too bad I lived in country X for
       | 7 months, they didn't change it then, and now I've been in
       | country Y for 2 months, across the world.
       | 
       | Why now? And why the wrong country? I have no links to country X
       | and I haven't been there in months.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-06-19 23:01 UTC)