RSS
Suing Google Because You Don't Like What It Links To
from the another-day,-another-bogus-Google-lawsuit dept
Google's lawyers certainly are kept busy these days, given all the
questionable lawsuits that seem to keep showing up. We've already
covered numerous examples of Google getting sued by people who don't
like how certain sites are ranked -- including last week's story of a
Chinese professor who is planning to sue Google (and Yahoo) to call
attention to the fact that both search engines have removed all evidence
of his existence from their search engines in China (after he called for
a more democratic China). Reader Jon writes in to let us know of
a slightly different lawsuit against Google. Rather than complaining
about missing content, this one is about there being too much content
found by Google. That is, two Australian real estate agents are suing
Google for linking to an allegedly defamatory article about the
agents.
Of course, even if the article is totally and completely defamatory, it's hard to see how Google has any liability whatsoever. If there's a defamatory article, then the liability is on whoever wrote it and put it online. The fact that Google found it in a search shouldn't transfer liability to them -- even if (as the agents indicate) Google was told that the content was defamatory. Google is merely a search engine and cannot be held liable for the content it links to. Hopefully this case gets thrown out of court rather quickly.
Of course, even if the article is totally and completely defamatory, it's hard to see how Google has any liability whatsoever. If there's a defamatory article, then the liability is on whoever wrote it and put it online. The fact that Google found it in a search shouldn't transfer liability to them -- even if (as the agents indicate) Google was told that the content was defamatory. Google is merely a search engine and cannot be held liable for the content it links to. Hopefully this case gets thrown out of court rather quickly.
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Ok
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Works
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Sounds like Pirate Bay....
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
The reason I agree with this article is that I don't believe the courts should answer this very important question for us.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: by Google Master on Feb 11th, 2008 @ 10:41am
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Barbara would be proud
Just for the laugh I used Yahoo to find it ;0)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Thinking the same thing
Pirate Bay has the same situation.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment