Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews

the-decoder.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 587 posts

Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews

#301

Post by applfanboysbgon »

Saline9515 wrote: post #285
brainwad wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has nothing to do with monopolies. Google was protected from defamation law with search because the page title and snippets were direct quotes from the linked result page. Whereas with AI overviews, the copy is written by a Google-controlled LLM.

It should be noted that defamation law has a very low threshold in Germany, to the point that businesses routinely sue Google Maps users for less-than-5-stars reviews. Google had to change their display of reviews because of this. Three stars review is taken down for "libel": https://support.google.com/maps/thread/367778263/google-maps... HNer gets a legal threat after saying that he didn't like a doctor: https://new…

> HNer gets a legal threat after saying that he didn't like a doctor: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44734895

This post is written by an LLM, and possibly a complete fabrication.

Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews

#302

Post by 9dev »

isaacfrond wrote: post #234
kuerbel wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't have to follow it but leading decisions (Grundsatzentscheidungen) still influence how a lower court judge might interpret the same law. Based on providing legal certainty instead of stare decisis though. It's not a must, more of an... aid

This is not such a decision though; it's a first instance decision at a lower court.

Still - a judge on another case will probably factor this one into their decision, but if they have a radically different view or the case is sufficiently different, they could just as well come to a different conclusion.

Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews

#303

Post by hunterpayne »

Gigachad wrote: post #286
hunterpayne wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"A journalist could not make up a harmful statement about someone and get away by saying the readers should have all read the sources." Journalists do that all the time. We even have a whole collection of words to describe it. Muckraking for instance is probably about 100 years old. Its even in the Google auto-complete in the browser I am posting from.

Notice the “get away with” part. Journalists can be held liable for making things up. And so should Google.

They aren't really held accountable in any way for this type of stuff.

Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews

#304

Post by arrowsmith »

Saline9515 wrote: post #285
brainwad wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has nothing to do with monopolies. Google was protected from defamation law with search because the page title and snippets were direct quotes from the linked result page. Whereas with AI overviews, the copy is written by a Google-controlled LLM.

It should be noted that defamation law has a very low threshold in Germany, to the point that businesses routinely sue Google Maps users for less-than-5-stars reviews. Google had to change their display of reviews because of this. Three stars review is taken down for "libel": https://support.google.com/maps/thread/367778263/google-maps... HNer gets a legal threat after saying that he didn't like a doctor: https://new…

See also: Germany's leader filing hundreds of criminal complaints against people who insult him on social media:

https://rmx.news/article/germany-chancellor-merz-quietly-fil...

Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews

#305

Post by input_sh »

circuit10 wrote: post #287
andrewmutz wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's a completely reasonable position that companies making self-driving cars and question/answer systems are legally liable for any errors. But if you hold that position, you also have to be fine with companies not offering products and services in your country. AI systems will eventually be good enough (in 10-20 years) for companies to be able to deploy such systems with sufficient accuracy to afford the la…

I think they should just have to properly explain how AI tends to make things up when it doesn’t know, and that it’s good for coming up with ideas or suggesting directions for research but that you shouldn’t rely on it, because currently their advertising makes you think you can rely on it The “AI can make mistakes” kind of disclaimers they hide in the corner don’t really cut it

It's not even in the corner, it's completely hidden by default. You have to click on "show more" to expand the AI barf to see it.

Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews

#306

Post by hansmayer »

sva_ wrote: post #80
Swizec wrote: post #18

Good. The true mark of AGI is when a company accepts liability and doesn’t bury “for entertainment purposes only” deep in their TOS. Same as it works with employees. Same for self-driving. Your car is not self-driving until it accepts liability and you count as just a passenger. But watch as Germany soon loses AI Google results.

It doesn't "bury [it] deep in their TOS", it says right under the box: > AI can make mistakes, so double-check responses

[dead]

Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews

#307

Post by 3ot »

applfanboysbgon wrote: post #301
Saline9515 wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It should be noted that defamation law has a very low threshold in Germany, to the point that businesses routinely sue Google Maps users for less-than-5-stars reviews. Google had to change their display of reviews because of this. Three stars review is taken down for "libel": https://support.google.com/maps/thread/367778263/google-maps... HNer gets a legal threat after saying that he didn't like a doctor: https://new…

> HNer gets a legal threat after saying that he didn't like a doctor: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44734895 This post is written by an LLM, and possibly a complete fabrication.

Yeah, I agree about the LLM part.

But can confirm from personal experience that businesses threaten to sue based on Google Maps reviews.

Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews

#308

Post by sham1 »

pembrook wrote: post #257

My feelings about this rest of the scope of liability. From my understanding, Google is now liable if making false claims about a personal/business reputation. I like this idea in theory (key word). However, I can easily see the slippery slope where in practice this means providing any AI response becomes too risky, and it becomes another money club used to extract wealth from big tech due to the current hysterical a…

The slippery slope of being held liable for an AI overview leading to neo-Hitler is certainly a take, and a ridiculous one at that.

It's one thing for an LLM to get things wrong. This case is not that though. And if big tech can't make sure that their models don't libel companies and individuals then good riddance. Whatever diminutive economic advantage one can get from "competitive LLMs" probably isn't worth it anyway, especially with all of the other disadvantages of these "competitive LLMs" compounding on our societies and the planet, as the resource usage of the data centres necessary to run and train them exacerbate the ongoing climate crisis.

Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews

#309

Post by z3t4 »

kevinxsun wrote: post #256

Regardless the scale, big or small, if you produce and spread untrue information to defame others, you are liable, period. These AI content are purely generated by Google's half baked AI. Not any other third party. So Google is 100% liable here. If you just display third party content, that's one thing, but if you generate content yourself and those content are false, harmful, that's on you. Google should be shamed t…

First they had links to other sites. Then they put the information found on other sites on their own site. Then they took the information from other sites, trained a LLM with it, and put it on their own site without even linking to the source.

Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews

#310

Post by NicuCalcea »

andrewmutz wrote: post #101
Swizec wrote: post #18

Good. The true mark of AGI is when a company accepts liability and doesn’t bury “for entertainment purposes only” deep in their TOS. Same as it works with employees. Same for self-driving. Your car is not self-driving until it accepts liability and you count as just a passenger. But watch as Germany soon loses AI Google results.

I think it's a completely reasonable position that companies making self-driving cars and question/answer systems are legally liable for any errors. But if you hold that position, you also have to be fine with companies not offering products and services in your country. AI systems will eventually be good enough (in 10-20 years) for companies to be able to deploy such systems with sufficient accuracy to afford the la…

Who would argue for offering self-driving cars before they're ready and safe? As a cyclist and pedestrian, of course I don't want them in my country if nobody's going to be liable when they run me over. Let them work out the kinks on Americans since they're so eager to be on the cutting edge of progress.
Post reply on HN