"Google said that their users should assume that anything electronically sent through Google’s servers is fair game to used for ads, or other purposes."
To put it bluntly, Google says, “a person has no legitimate expectation of privacy in information he voluntarily turns over to third parties."
So nope it is within the context unless there is a legal requirement to use users data for ads or other purposes.
And if you read the actual motion[1], you'll see that's referring to people that send email to people with gmail accounts, not the account holders themselves. Quoting Smith v Maryland didn't exactly endear them to me in that case, but it is certain true that "Just as a sender of a letter to a business colleague cannot be surprised that the recipient’s assistant opens the letter, people who use web-based email today cannot be surprised if their communications are processed by the recipient’s ECS provider in the course of delivery." Sorry, but if you send an email to me, I'll treat it as I see fit, including letting my email provide run ads on it to pay for my service, and no, that "confidentiality notice" you included has absolutely no legal power over my email account.
"Google said that their users should assume that anything electronically sent through Google’s servers is fair game to used for ads, or other purposes."
To put it bluntly, Google says, “a person has no legitimate expectation of privacy in information he voluntarily turns over to third parties."
So nope it is within the context unless there is a legal requirement to use users data for ads or other purposes.