• Dr Janice Duffy

    Google
    removed the defamatory autocomplete referring to a Irish hotel in November 2011
    after a conciliation conference at the Irish Court. This is the original story
    (complete with screenshots): http://searchengineland.com/irish-hotel-sues-google-for-defamation-over-autocomplete-suggestion-81492

    A subsequent
    search for the hotel on all Google local domains shows that
    the defamatory word ‘receivership’ has been removed from the autocomplete.
    In a nutshell, the case settled and Google made it go away because, well, they
    can.

    In my
    case, because I am suing Google, the defamatory autocomplete not only remains
    on all local domains but is now a Google AdWords keyword.
    Google does what it wishes and I cannot do anything about this at the present
    time. Currently, we are in discovery and we have asked for
    information that the defendants will likely not want to produce. However, the
    court will order the disclosure of documents pertaining to the Google algorithm
    in due course and Google will have to comply because of the defence that they
    have pleaded.

    In the
    meantime, more power to Bettina Wulff. I will certainly contact
    her representatives and offer some information.

  • Branislav Blesák

    Should Google really be held responsible for showing what people search for? These people suing Google can´t differentiate between cause and effect. Google´s autosuggest only reflects public opinion. Instead of throwing money at lawyers they should hire online reputation management experts.

  • Maurice Walshe

    Yes just becase a minority of people think say that Negro should be spelt with two G’s – doesnt mean it would be right or a good idea to feature it as an complete for a certain American polatician – liekwise Anti semitic slurs for say french presindents.

    “an algorithem did it” is not defence that will stand up in court – auto complete is a nightmare and is an example why just becase you can do somthing doesnt mean you should atomaticaly do it.

  • http://blog.clayburngriffin.com/ Clayburn Griffin

    I can’t believe they lose these lawsuits. This is not editorial content. It’s not subject to being libel. And even if it was, it’s an affront to free speech.