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

371–380 of 587 posts

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

#371

Post by prox »

CarlitosHighway wrote: post #333
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…

You cannot get sued for a review just because it's lower than 5 stars. But of course if you write something like "I found a dead cockroach in my pizza", or "I hard that they don't clean the dishes enough" in a review without proof, that's defamation. And it doesn't matter if you give 1 or 5 stars with the review.

Also competitors would leave shit reviews and Googles completely brick walling any way to rectify or moderate reviews made it a shit service in true Google fashion. Google and service live in two different worlds.

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

#372

Post by crest »

Hfuffzehn wrote: post #220

If I get it correctly I like the ruling. So Google has established a product called Search. For that product rules have been established. Google has monopolized that product. Now Google is replacing that product with a new product. But they keep calling it the same thing. Because they want to keep their monopoly. That is what has been deemed illegal. Gemini is not illegal. Pretending the worst version of Gemini is Se…

The court ruled that the AI generated content has an author/editor/publisher: Google. It also ruled that Google can be held liable. Insert pikachu face meme.

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

#373

Post by fauigerzigerk »

Hfuffzehn wrote: post #359
fauigerzigerk wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure. Is it really just the misleading part that the court takes issue with, i.e portraying Gemini output as a search result? In my view, the ruling could mean that Gemini's output is legally seen as first-person speech by Google regardless of where it is published.

Sure that could be the worst case. But then we are in the case law vs. continental law debate for lawyers. When I wrote "Gemini is not illegal" it would have been more correct to say that the court has not decided about Gemini but specifically about search. And I do think it makes sense to distinguish between explicitly chatting with an LLM and entering something in the search bar people have used for decades now.

I completely agree with you that this particular ruling does not make Gemini illegal in Germany.

I'm just wondering whether the logic of the ruling is tied to the specific context (search results) or applied more generally to LLM generated text.

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

#374

Post by breezybottom »

belorn wrote: post #368
camillomiller wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wrote a one star review and posted pictures of a badly burnt pizza served at a restaurant in Berlin. Google sent me an email telling me they removed that because the restaurant filed a defamation claim

Sounds similar to Nintendo dmca takedowns. You could challenge the defamation claim in court and win, but you would have to spend a lot of money and time, and the only thing you get back in the end is the right to post the review.

How is that remotely similar? DMCA is about IP law.

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

#375

Post by joe_mamba »

Saline9515 wrote: post #351
CarlitosHighway wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anecdotal

Of course, Google spends engineering/legal hours to make country-specific changes relative to problems that do not exist.

Save your breath. CarlitosHighway's posts on this thread shows he's just blindly running defense for Germany's status quo on defamation laws low threshold for abuse on every argument someone brings, not being open to arguing in good faith, weightings in on the pros and cons of this, so it doesn't matter what counterexamples you keep bringing to him, it won't change his mind, his replies will be more "anecdotal" snarks.

When you see the pattern, best to stopped arguing with such users as their goal is not an honest debate, their goal is just to 'DDoS' you with their opinion.

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

#376

Post by fakedang »

prox wrote: post #371
CarlitosHighway wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You cannot get sued for a review just because it's lower than 5 stars. But of course if you write something like "I found a dead cockroach in my pizza", or "I hard that they don't clean the dishes enough" in a review without proof, that's defamation. And it doesn't matter if you give 1 or 5 stars with the review.

Also competitors would leave shit reviews and Googles completely brick walling any way to rectify or moderate reviews made it a shit service in true Google fashion. Google and service live in two different worlds.

* FAANGAMO and service live in two different worlds

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

#377

Post by soco »

9dev wrote: post #311
gblargg wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought Google labeled its AI summary with a disclaimer already. I don't want companies to be forced to only offer safe-for-children services.

It's unbelievable how lightly some people hand over the tools for mass manipulation to a single corporation in the name of freedom of all things. We're not talking about a laser pointer here.

Heck even laser pointers are regulated, now that we're thinking about it.

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

#379

Post by arrowsmith »

smcin wrote: post #352
arrowsmith wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

Shocking, only 10 short years since this (when Merkel was Chancellor): Turkey asks Germany to prosecute comedian Jan Böhmermann (Germany's equivalent of John Stewart) over Erdoğan poem https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11474967

Which led to a British journalist holding an "offensive poems about Erdogan" contest, which was won by Boris Johnson:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/19/boris-johns...

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

#380

Post by sfifs »

tristanj wrote: post #5

Anyone know if this ruling applies to answers generated by AI chatbots, such as ChatGPT/Gemini/Claude? All three have the ability to perform a web search, then compose a reply based on the search results. Pretty much the exact thing that Google AI Overview does. This ruling may make them liable for false answers.

Pretty sure this ruling will be used as a precedent in cases against the other providers really soon. As I understand it, there is a legal cottage industry that brings digital related cases (eg. Copyright) in Germany.
Post reply on HN