Google was famously founded by two math geeks with an interest in making things better. Their unofficial company motto has been "don't be evil" since outlined in the 2004 IPO prospectus (a.k.a. the don't be evil manifesto). The full text read:

"Don’t be evil. We believe strongly that in the long term, we will be better served — as shareholders and in all other ways — by a company that does good things for the world even if we forgo some short term gains."

This has left open the door for tech pundits and critics to claim over the years that Google has lost its way and become evil. Evil is a strong term, decidedly so and I think the company understood that when they adopted the motto. It takes a level of effort that cannot go un-noticed to become evil.

Over the past few weeks the "evil" claims have resurfaced in part because of the proposed changes to the official Privacy Policy. The goal from Google's standpoint was to create a unified policy across all google services. It is not without merit; most people never read the policy (much less Google's 60+ separate policies). In discussing the policy changes, Google said:

"Our new policy reflects our desire to create a simple product experience that does what you need, when you want it to."

Where the latest kerfuffle arose is not in the unification aspect, but in perceived changes to what Google can and will do with user information. The most basic explanation of what the new policy does is it allows all ¹ Google services to collect and share information across all properties. For example, an article read in Google Reader may eventually serve as data to feed you an ad in gmail. It may also help guide you to specific services or interests you might have overlooked.

Initial reactions have been largely negative, focusing on the lack of control users now have.

Cecilia Kang of The Washington Post identified one of the major problems as this:

"Consumers won’t be able to opt out of the changes, which take effect March 1. And experts say the policy shift will invite greater scrutiny from federal regulators of the company’s privacy and competitive practices."

While this may not be in the best interest of users, it is a far cry from "evil." In fact Ben Brooks of Brooks Review may have said it best:

"These services should have never been sandboxed to begin with, but they are. Google wants to change that. There’s good and bad with it, but I for one think there is far more good than bad here."

Another damning point of discussion relates to log, device and location information. Google will collect and store user IP addresses and device information, such as model, software, phone number and UDID's. This is not new for all services, but now it can be shared. For example, maybe you take and share a picture from your phone to Picassa, post it on Google+ and email it to Mom via Gmail. With the new policy this picture could now be identified with you across multiple services and tracked across the web for years.

What's my point here? Simply, it is critical for users to understand the implications involved before agreeing to Google's new privacy terms (and any online terms for that matter). It takes just five minutes to actually read the policy. And at the end of the day, you can make an informed desicion on whether Google is evil. Or not. 

All Google services with the exception of Wallet, Chrome and Chrome OS and Books.