Google recently updated its Terms of Service to state that its services and devices may connect to the internet in the background even when they are not being actively used, and that any resulting data usage and associated costs are the responsibility of the user.
This provision makes the logic of digital capitalism more visible. In classical capitalism, a company sells a product to a consumer, and when that product is not in use, the economic relationship largely comes to a halt. In digital capitalism, however, services operate continuously, data flows constantly, and infrastructure consumes resources on an ongoing basis. As a result, the system continues to function even when the user is inactive. Within this cycle, part of the cost of maintaining the infrastructure is transferred to the user.
Google states that it may terminate access to its services and delete the accounts of users who do not accept its Terms of Service. Although the right to choose remains legally with the user, the social and economic cost of that choice is steadily increasing. Applicants are often advised to use a Gmail address when submitting school applications. The vast majority of Android phones come tied to Google services. Many websites and applications offer a “Sign in with Google” option. Under these conditions, the decision may theoretically be ours, but in practice the core infrastructures of communication, education, work, and public services are organized around a small number of major platforms. Consequently, when users refuse to accept the terms of service, they are compelled to abandon not only a particular service but also the network of relationships connected to it.
This situation is also part of the way digital platforms generate economic value. By collecting user data, digital platforms have developed an economic model based on predicting and influencing behavior; in the critical literature, this model is frequently described as “surveillance capitalism.” In this context, users indirectly contribute to the production of surplus value through the data they generate in exchange for the benefits they receive from free services. A significant portion of this value is then monetized by platform companies. This raises an important question: how fair is the distribution of economic value produced within a digital ecosystem from which users find it increasingly difficult to exit?
Leave a Reply