Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Morning Legal Briefs

View
10 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >

10. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Nov 28, 2012, 15:36 DrEvil
 
Cutter wrote on Nov 27, 2012, 15:35:
Because in these cases these people have gone so far as to hire lawyers to send notices to Google about the problem and nothing gets done. Imagine everytime someone google your name - potential employer maybe - and it came up with a bunch of links about you being a gangster or child rapist or the like. What if these links are in countries where you have no legal recourse or the cost of getting them removed is too high? No, Google has a responsibility here. Everyone is accountable, there is no 'I was just following orders' bullshit.

I understand the sentiment, but this is an impossible task. The only way to deal with this is to after the source of the libel -- not Google.

Google is providing a generic search engine, if people post garbage, and search for something related, the garbage will come out.

All someone has to do after their link is excluded from Google's search index is rename it and poof, they're back again.

So what's the point of making Google exclude specific URLs (out of billions) from their search results? None.

Google is not at fault here; it's impractical to expect them to police the stupidity of others or waste their time trying to censor the world.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
9. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Nov 27, 2012, 17:59 Cutter
 
NegaDeath wrote on Nov 27, 2012, 16:52:
So what happens with the opposite scenario? Someone who DID do something wrong and wants the info taken off of search results? Can they sue too? What if its something simple like a person not wanting their name to appear in google results, can they sue if google won't do it? Who is the ultimate decider if a takedown notice is valid or not? We can't say google is as apparently we can now successfully sue them if we disagree with their decision. Do we have to clog the courts to get a ruling on every takedown? Does google comply with every request out of fear of litigation? This guy went after a yahoo news website to take the info down and won, going after google is double dipping. What happened to him sucks but it doesn't justify breaking the internet. There's a good reason other judges have turned these sorts of cases down.

Sophistry! Much like if you don't want your picture taken but you're in a public place, guess what, you have no recourse. If it's an issue where it can cause personal or financial harm to someone then yes, they do have recourse - which is why the courts in a few different countries have come down in favour of the plaintiffs in these types of cases. And it's not like companies like Google can plead poverty saying it would be too much to have staff to address these issues when they easily can because it's not like this happening en masse. If it was then it would be a legislative issue to be resolved in a way that's fair for both parties. Until then they do have some responsibility in these sorts of matters.
 
Avatar 25394
 
"The South will boogie again!" - Disco Stu
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
8. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Nov 27, 2012, 17:55 Prez
 
Sepharo wrote on Nov 27, 2012, 14:20:
Totally disagree. The torrent sites should also not be getting sued. Sites presenting publicly available data via algorithms should not have to manicure them by hand when requested. That data was not created by them.

Agreed. The court is wrong in this case.
 
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
7. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Nov 27, 2012, 16:52 NegaDeath
 
So what happens with the opposite scenario? Someone who DID do something wrong and wants the info taken off of search results? Can they sue too? What if its something simple like a person not wanting their name to appear in google results, can they sue if google won't do it? Who is the ultimate decider if a takedown notice is valid or not? We can't say google is as apparently we can now successfully sue them if we disagree with their decision. Do we have to clog the courts to get a ruling on every takedown? Does google comply with every request out of fear of litigation? This guy went after a yahoo news website to take the info down and won, going after google is double dipping. What happened to him sucks but it doesn't justify breaking the internet. There's a good reason other judges have turned these sorts of cases down.  
Avatar 57352
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
6. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Nov 27, 2012, 15:54 Orogogus
 
It's censorship. What if I want to find information about the court case about the guy in Australia who was incorrectly linked to organized crime? Down the memory hole it goes, oh well. What about countries where the legal authorities are themselves appalling?  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
5. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Nov 27, 2012, 15:35 Cutter
 
Because in these cases these people have gone so far as to hire lawyers to send notices to Google about the problem and nothing gets done. Imagine everytime someone google your name - potential employer maybe - and it came up with a bunch of links about you being a gangster or child rapist or the like. What if these links are in countries where you have no legal recourse or the cost of getting them removed is too high? No, Google has a responsibility here. Everyone is accountable, there is no 'I was just following orders' bullshit.
 
Avatar 25394
 
"The South will boogie again!" - Disco Stu
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
4. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Nov 27, 2012, 14:31 Silicon Avatar
 
How is Google going to patrol the billions of links it has. If it misses even one they get a lawsuit? That'd just turn into a lawyer free for all. It's bogus.

 
Avatar 18037
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
3. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Nov 27, 2012, 14:20 Orogogus
 
I thought people here were generally angry and indignant when the torrent sites get hit.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
2. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Nov 27, 2012, 14:20 Sepharo
 
Totally disagree. The torrent sites should also not be getting sued. Sites presenting publicly available data via algorithms should not have to manicure them by hand when requested. That data was not created by them.  
Avatar 17249
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
1. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Nov 27, 2012, 12:19 Cutter
 
Good, Google should be successfully sued over this sort of thing. It's happened to them before. It's one thing for them to post the links it's another when they're informed said links are erroneous and illegal and they don't do a thing about it. And it's zero different from torrent sites who are simply providing information as well. If they can get popped so should the big boys.

 
Avatar 25394
 
"The South will boogie again!" - Disco Stu
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
10 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo