Rijo questions Google's distinction between direct and derived data

Luis RijoPPC Land founder and writer

Rijo questions Google's distinction between direct use and derived data. He points to a separate passage about model training that says a summary may be an entire email, while acknowledging Google's stated restrictions on direct ad targeting.

“the same page says a summary can be the whole email.”

Analysis

Open source (opens in a new tab)Google lets connected Gmail and Photos data shape ads, 5 years after pledgeDiscussion of direct use, derived summaries and the model-training passage
Google's name on the glass facade of its headquarters in Mountain View, California.
Credit: Asoundd / CC BY-SA 4.0

Where this statement fits

Google adds an opt-in advertising exception for Gmail and Photos; Whitwam objects

Google's updated privacy policy adds an exception when users choose to make Drive, Gmail or Photos data available to other Google services supporting personalized ads. Google emphasizes opt-in connections and limits on direct use. Ryan Whitwam argues that indirect use increases privacy risk.

Read the full case

Case updates

Want the next important update?

Follow this case and get an email when an important development changes the record.

Important updates only. Free. Confirm your email to start. Unsubscribe anytime. How we handle your email.

Source and context

Analysis

Google lets connected Gmail and Photos data shape ads, 5 years after pledge (opens in a new tab)Discussion of direct use, derived summaries and the model-training passage

About this source

Rijo compares Google's direct-targeting restriction with its treatment of derived information. The whole-email passage he cites concerns model training, rather than a statement that ads directly target raw email contents.

Archived copy (opens in a new tab)

Before the quotation

Rijo discusses Google's opt-in policy exception and its direct-targeting restriction.

After the quotation

The whole-email example he cites appears in a passage about model training. Google separately describes restrictions on direct ad targeting.

How this statement is classified

Challenged the characterization

The label describes this statement's response within the context above.

Why this label?

Rijo disputes the adequacy of Google's direct-versus-derived distinction. His cited whole-email example concerns model training, so it does not establish direct email targeting for ads.

Recorded on
Published here

More from this case

Read the full case

Share or embed this statement

Quote card: Luis Rijo, Rijo questions Google's distinction between direct and derived dataDownload image (PNG)

The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the statement page.

Cite this record

Publisher
The Dispute Index
Title
Rijo questions Google's distinction between direct and derived data
First published
Last updated
Permalink
https://disputeindex.com/events/6827-rijo-questions-google-s-distinction-between-direct-use

Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.

The Dispute Index. "Rijo questions Google's distinction between direct and derived data". First published: 2026-10-26. Last updated: 2026-10-26. https://disputeindex.com/events/6827-rijo-questions-google-s-distinction-between-direct-use