Website Held Liable for the Way Google Search Excerpted It   - 738 Views, 1 Comment

Summary: A website in Holland - Miljoenhuizen.nl - has been held liable for the summary that Google search turned up for its site. Yes, you read that right - they were held responsible for the fact that Google excerpted and concatenated text from their webpage in a way that suggested that the plaintiff, the BMW dealership Zwartepoorte, had gone bankrupt.

Previous Article « China Blocking Twitter, Flickr, YouTube and More as 20 Year Anniversary of Tiananmen Square Looms
Read Next Article » Louisiana Legislators Approve Internet Tax on All Users

  Follow Anne on Twitter     Friend Anne on Facebook

A website in Holland - Miljoenhuizen.nl - has been held liable for the summary that Google search turned up for its site. Yes, you read that right - they were held responsible for the fact that Google excerpted and concatenated text from their webpage in a way that suggested that the plaintiff, the BMW dealership Zwartepoorte, had gone bankrupt.

Let’s be clear: the Miljoenhuizen.nl website did not suggest that the Zwartepoorte dealership had gone bankrupt. Google’s search algorithm grabbed text from Miljoenhuizen.nl’s website, and cobbled it together in the Google search results in such a manner that it appeared that Miljoenhuizen.nl was suggesting that Zwartepoorte had gone bankrupt.

When searching for the terms “Zwartepoorte” and “bankrupt”, Google search returned this summary (translated here):

Complete name: Zwartepoorte Specialiteit: BMW…This company has been declared bankrupt, it has been acquired by the motordealer I have worked for Boat Rialto…

The judge in the case (which was heard in Holland - but that doesn’t mean that people in other countries shouldn’t be concerned) held the web site liable because, according to a translation and explanation by Joris van Hoboken, a Dutch law student, “because some Google users did indeed think the company had gone bankrupt, because the company had asked Miljoenhuizen.nl to correct the problem, and because Miljoenhuizen.nl had somehow, at some time in the past, attempted to optimize its Google search ranking.”

Also, Hoboken goes on to explain, the court stated that “it would be rather easy for Miljoenhuizen.nl to edit its site so that something else turned up in the snippet,”, adding that “this may be because Miljoenhuizen.nl said as much during the court case - before retracting its words in statements to the press.”

Hoboken concludes that “The Court argues that it might be true that the website had no control over the functioning of Google but suggests that these questions about the opacity of Google’s functioning should be addressed in a broader context… then concludes that defendant had its own responsibility.”

Website Held Liable for the Way Google Search Excerpted It

 Follow Anne on Twitter

 Twitter Explained in Plain English

 Friend Anne on Facebook

Previous Article « China Blocking Twitter, Flickr, YouTube and More as 20 Year Anniversary of Tiananmen Square Looms
Read Next Article » Louisiana Legislators Approve Internet Tax on All Users

Read more:

»  Adult-Themed Website Perfect 10 Sues Google, Amazon Over Search Results

»  Google, the Default Search Engine for Firefox, Opera and Safari, Complains that MSN is the Default Search Engine for IE7

»  Google Sued By Pornographer for Their Search Engine Working…Too Well?

»  The Site You Are About to Visit May Harm Your Computer! Google Warns Searchers of Malware-Infested Search Results

For additional similar stories check out our archives on Around the World, Google, Internet Law

NOTE: We never, ever, ever will recommend any product or service on this site that we have not regularly used ourselves and do not wholeheartedly believe in. That said, in some cases after being very pleased with a product or service, we may enter into a relationship with the provider of that product or service such that if someone purchases that product or service based on our recommendation, we may get a small payment. Such payments go towards the upkeep of the Internet Patrol.

 

1 Comment »

  1. German decided law is almost as bad. You as website promulgator can be held liable for a malefactor’s misleading page you have linked to. There are boiler-plate disavowals of responsibility that every sane webmaster will want to include. Even with them, though, if you negligently fail to act on notice of a problem at a linked site or if you should reasonably have known about it but didn’t, you’ll be on the hook.

    Comment by Dallman Ross — 6/4/2009 @ 4:25 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a comment

Warning! All comments which contain URLs and are clearly just spam to generate a link back to the URL will be deleted on sight. Don't bother wasting your time!

If you are going to include a URL in your comment,
please keep it under 25 characters in length,
or use TinyURL to shorten it before including it in your comment.

Line and paragraph breaks are automatic, your email address is never displayed.
HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

(required)

(required)


If you have not posted a comment here before, we apologize for having to ask you to enter the letters and numbers you see in the image above to validate your comment, but we are being attacked by thousands of comment form spams every day! You only need to do this once; once you have successfuly posted a comment here you will not be asked to do this again. Thank you for your understanding!

 
 This article first appeared on 6/4/2009
The Internet Patrol
Patrolling the Internet for You!