# data[].attributes.headline
Here is an older article in which Google is sued by the government of China.

# data[].attributes.subject
Here is an older article in which Google is sued by the government of China.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A Beijing judge has told the Chinese novelist Mian Mian, who is suing Google over its plan to create an online library, to hold settlement talks.
After a two-hour hearing, the court ordered both sides to talk but did not set a deadline for reporting back, according to the author's lawyer.

She is seeking damages of 61,000 yuan ($8,950; £5,576) and a public apology.

The lawsuit was filed in October after Google scanned one of Mian Mian's books, Acid House, into its library.

Google said it had removed the book as soon as it learned of the lawsuit, but had no further comment on the case.

Mian Mian writes risque novels - including titles such as Panda Sex and Candy - about China's underworld of sex, drugs and nightlife. Most of her work is banned in China.

She is not alone in complaining about copyright issues raised by Google's online library. The China Written Works Copyright Society is also looking for compensation for other Chinese authors whose work is included in the project.

In France, a court ordered Google to stop digitising French books without the publisher's approval. The search engine was also told to pay 300,000 euros ($430,000; £268,000) in damages and interest to French company La Martiniere, which had sued for copyright infringement for scanning book excerpts.

In the US, Google agreed a $125m settlement with American authors and publishers - although this is still waiting for final court approval.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Google is sued by Chinese author Mian Mian

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A Beijing judge has told the Chinese novelist Mian Mian, who is suing Google over its plan to create an online library, to hold settlement talks. After a two-hour hearing, the court ordered both sides to talk but did not set a deadline for reporting back, according to the author's lawyer.

# data[].attributes.headline
Below is a news clip from KHOU that discusses the up coming HISD policy to provide laptops for students.  

# data[].attributes.subject
Below is a news clip from KHOU that discusses the up coming HISD policy to provide laptops for students.  

# data[].attributes.body
This article demonstrates how the access to the internet is widening to points many believed not possible even 10 years ago. Education is expanding access to technology rapidly in the 21st Century.

# data[].attributes.headline
This article touches upon has current laws are just know being to catch up with the internet age.  It spells out how we have little offial rights to privacy online.

# data[].attributes.subject
This article touches upon has current laws are just know being to catch up with the internet age.  It spells out how we have little offial rights to privacy online.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
California's Right to Know Act would force Google and Facebook to reveal what personal information they've collected and how it's being used

Getty Images

It should not come as a surprise to anyone these days that Internet companies have "digital dossiers" on all of us - the websites we visit, the friends we've sent emails to, the photos we're tagged in, the medical symptoms we've searched for. But there has never been any way for us to know just what these companies know about us - or who they're selling our information to.

But that could finally be about to change - in California, which is on the cutting edge of technology policy, and perhaps, eventually for the whole nation. A long-overdue bill in the California legislature, "The Right to Know Act," would force companies such as Google and Facebook to reveal what personal information they have collected and how it's being used.

The public cares about Internet privacy - even though tech companies like to argue otherwise - and opinion polls show strong support for laws to protect it. In one national poll, respondents favored a law disclosing all information collected on users by a 69% to 29% margin. But this popular support for online privacy has not translated into strong legal protections - both because the public has not been good about demanding privacy laws and because industry has been very good at blocking them.

( MORE: Will We Ever Get Strong Internet Privacy Rules?)

The Right to Know Act has been getting a great deal of attention. Civil liberties organizations, privacy advocates and women's groups have been urging the state legislature to pass the bill - and if the will of the people were the only consideration, it would seem destined to pass speedily. But powerful tech companies are lined up against the bill - and it's looking like it will be a tough fight.

Personal information has been called "the web's new gold mine," because it can be used to target personalized advertising to Internet users - a lucrative business - and it can be sold to an array of shadowy data brokers who have many ways of turning it into cash. Tech companies are not eager to part with their new-found riches. Some of the biggest ones such as Google, Facebook and Microsoft, are members of an industry trade group, TechAmerica, that is working against the bill. The San Jose Mercury News credits industry lobbying with getting a hearing on the bill, which was to have occurred this month, pushed into May.

Tech companies like to argue that laws like the Right to Know Act are a threat to their business models, and to their ability to keep providing services like Facebook and Google search for free. But the California bill only requires companies to be transparent about what they are doing - it does not limit their ability to collect or use personal information. And it includes business-friendly protections, including a provision that says that companies only need to provide each user with an accounting every 12 months.

( MORE: What You Need to Know About the Latest Twitter Privacy Ruling)

After years of complacency, there are finally signs that the public is starting to demand greater privacy rights. Last week, in a long-awaited move, a powerful Senate committee endorsed an amendment to a key federal law that would give greater privacy protection by requiring the government to get a search warrant when it wants to read people's emails. (Under current law, the government only needs a warrant when it wants to read email that has not been opened by the recipient and that is newer than 180-days old.)

The California bill - despite all the industry squawking - is fairly conservative. It does not give Internet users the right to correct or delete their personal data or to block companies from selling it to other companies - which are some of the real high-stakes issues in Internet privacy. In a perfect world, we would have put users in control of their information when the Internet was first created. But it will be a long time, if ever, before we get that sort of robust privacy. For now, California's Right to Know is an important, if modest, first step.

MORE: Should the FBI Be Allowed to Wiretap Facebook?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Internet Privacy: A New Bill Finally Offers Protections

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It should not come as a surprise to anyone these days that Internet companies have "digital dossiers" on all of us - the websites we visit, the friends we've sent emails to, the photos we're tagged in, the medical symptoms we've searched for.

# data[].attributes.headline
This website is Enough is Enough.  This non-profit from the government of Virginia has created websites to education teens and adults on the the dangers of social media.

# data[].attributes.subject
This website is Enough is Enough.  This non-profit from the government of Virginia has created websites to education teens and adults on the the dangers of social media.

# data[].attributes.body
child-proof caps on medicine bottles.

The only people it seems to keep out are

the adults! This is humor, of course! How-

ever, I can recall numerous times in which

students where able to get articales and

website up in my class with in seconds dispite

the firewalls and safety codes in place.

# data[].attributes.headline
Privacy laws with regard to the internet

# data[].attributes.subject
Privacy laws with regard to the internet

# data[].attributes.body
are not in step with the current technology.

It is often the case that governments, companies,

and individuals such as Google and Apple can

collect information about people (and share) with-

out breaking current privacy laws in the US.

# data[].attributes.headline
The above cartoon depicts sensorship of the web in 

# data[].attributes.subject
The above cartoon depicts sensorship of the web in 

# data[].attributes.body
China. Many areas of the word, in particular countries

with strained relationships with West, limit local access

to the internet. Access to the internet is not universal. The social, political and economic empacts of the internet are only now coming to light in cases such as the Arab Spring.

# data[].attributes.headline
The internet has opened up the world like never before.  How much is too much?

# data[].attributes.subject
The internet has opened up the world like never before.  How much is too much?

# data[].attributes.headline
Who should be concerned with internet saftey?

# data[].attributes.subject
Who should be concerned with internet saftey?

# data[].attributes.body
Parents are the ones that have the issues, not kids!