Google Inc. (Alphabet Inc.) | Report on AI data usage oversight at Google Inc. (Alphabet Inc.)

Status
12.37% votes in favour
AGM date
Previous AGM date
Proposal number
11
Resolution details
Company ticker
GOOGL
Lead filer
National Legal and Policy Center
Resolution ask
Report on or disclose
ESG theme
  • Social
ESG sub-theme
  • Digital rights
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Shareholder
Company sector
Technology
Company HQ country
United States
Resolved clause
Shareholders request the Company to prepare a report, at reasonable cost, omitting proprietary or legally privileged information, to be published within one year of the Annual Meeting and updated annually thereafter, which assesses the risks to the Company’s operations and finances, and to public welfare, presented by the real or potential unethical or improper usage of external data in the development, training, and deployment of its artificial intelligence offerings; what steps the Company takes to mitigate those risks; and how it measures the effectiveness of such efforts.
Whereas clause
"The immense and transformative potential of artificial intelligence comes with substantial risks.
The development and training of AI systems rely on vast amounts of data, and public information available via the Internet may not be enough to quench developers’ insatiable thirst for high-quality training data.1 Thus, stakeholders are concerned that developers will draw from sources in an unethical or illegal manner.2 3 4"
Supporting statement
"Alphabet Inc. (“Alphabet” or “Company”) is an early leader in the AI arms race,5 which has helped push the Company to one of the highest market capitalizations in the world.6

Some outlets project that the “unrivaled” data access and dominance in the search market7 of subsidiary Google will position Alphabet to eventually overtake its AI competitors8 and be the first to establish dominance in the generative AI market. Given Alphabet’s suspect record on data ethics, shareholders, consumers, and businesses should be concerned that the Company’s AI expansion will drive further misconduct.


Past abuses include:

• On behalf of the European Union, Ireland’s Data Protection Commission has opened an inquiry into one of Alphabet’s AI models, which could be a “‘high risk to the rights and freedoms of individuals’ in the EU.”9
• Google settled a “class-action suit that sought damage payments of at least $5 billion”10 for “pervasively tracking their internet use through browsers set in ‘private’ mode.”11 The Company agreed to delete all the data collected.12
• Google abandoned plans to remove third-party cookies from its Chrome browser after advertisers expressed concerns about the effectiveness of Google’s personalized advertising – Alphabet’s largest revenue driver.13 The reversal drew scrutiny from the United Kingdom’s Competition and Markets Authority, which argued that “concerns remain.”14
• The Company has longstanding ties with U.S. intelligence agencies, which raises concerns about Alphabet’s role in surveillance on US citizens.15 16


These are just a few of Alphabet’s many privacy and ethics violations.17 18 19 20



Prioritizing data ethics in Alphabet’s AI development will help avoid harmful fiduciary and regulatory21 22 consequences.23 Developers who prioritize ethical data usage will reap the benefits of consumer trust,24 while those that do not will suffer.


Alphabet’s position in the AI arms race, and its associated historic valuation, hang in the balance."

How other organisations have declared their voting intentions

Organisation nameDeclared voting intentionsRationale
Anima SgrForThe proposed report would help shareholders better understand and evaluate the company's management and oversight of related risks, particularly in a context of evolving regulatory developments.
THEMATICS Asset ManagementFor

DISCLAIMER: By including a shareholder resolution or management proposal in this database, neither the PRI nor the sponsor of the resolution or proposal is seeking authority to act as proxy for any shareholder; shareholders should vote their proxies in accordance with their own policies and requirements.

Any voting recommendations set forth in the descriptions of the resolutions and management proposals included in this database are made by the sponsors of those resolutions and proposals, and do not represent the views of the PRI.

Information on the shareholder resolutions, management proposals and votes in this database have been obtained from sources that are believed to be reliable, but the PRI does not represent that it is accurate, complete, or up-to-date, including information relating to resolutions and management proposals, other signatories’ vote pre-declarations (including voting rationales), or the current status of a resolution or proposal. You should consult companies’ proxy statements for complete information on all matters to be voted on at a meeting.