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

431–440 of 587 posts

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

#431

Post by biztos »

biosboiii wrote: post #394
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.

There are agencies in Germany where you can buy review removals in a web shop for like 50 euros per review. You just have to link the review and they will send Google a legal document to delete it.

So you can take down any especially glowing reviews of your competitors for only 50€ a shot? Nice!

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

#432

Post by 9rx »

ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #409
boringg wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean was google search responsible for surfacing correct answers? I am not a defend of AI but this seems like a weird piece of legislation.

No, Google search was simply repeating quotes from other websites - those other websites would be responsible for their content. Now that Google is manufacturing answers using their own LLM, they are responsible for whatever results that produces.

> Now that Google is manufacturing answers

There isn't someone at a keyboard typing content. It's still just search, repeating quotes from other websites. The difference is that the algorithms have turned lossy, so the quotes are not always preserved in their original form.

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

#433

Post by lo_zamoyski »

h1fra wrote: post #425

People will complain, but eventually Europe will still be in advance regarding this kind of law. It's annoying and sometimes slows down innovation but US companies are just doing whatever makes money without restrictions...

> slows down innovation

A return to the classical understanding of the person, society, and the common good is indispensable.

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

#434

Post by t-3 »

doubled112 wrote: post #406
mystraline wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The answer is you stay clear of US law jurisdictions and post your code to gitflic.ru Its where the DRM bypass software lives these days, along with Bypass Paywalls Clean.

I've been on the internet for a long time, and it still surprises me that people willingly post emulator code next to their real names on Github.

There's nothing illegal about emulation, IP theft is illegal. 99%+ of emulator projects are totally legal except in insanely corrupt countries.

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

#435

Post by leodavi »

sheiyei wrote: post #169
mmmpetrichor wrote: post #137

This makes sense to me. AI is amazing tech, but it's being oversold to naive public, either on the back of hype, or cynically, knowing they can do it with inpunity, (I'm not sure which). HN users have a way better than average grasp of what AI is and we can be skeptical of results, the general public has no clue.

100% cynically. It's a game of infinite money glitch (also known as "grab as much as you can before it's over") and has been at least since GPT-3.

How does that apply to AI Overview in Search, though? As far as I can tell it's pure spend on every search, which I know adds up even for nano models.

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

#436

Post by dcrazy »

jorvi wrote: post #429
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.

Nope, that is not defamation. Both defamation and libel require it to be a false statement. If you did find a cockroach or your plate was dirty, you can freely say so without needing to provide extensive proof.

Are you speaking about the law in Germany? Truth is not an absolute defense to libel in all countries.

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

#437

Post by f33d5173 »

account42 wrote: post #277
f33d5173 wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Corporations are you. Corporations provide a service to individuals, often in exchange for money. Restricting corporations from doing something is the same as restricting people from receiving that as a service.

I guess we're all just temporarily confused FAANGs.

Banning faangs from doing something also bans small companies from doing it, and regardless prevents the user from receiving it as a service. You shouldn't let anger at large companies excuse stupid regulations.

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

#438

Post by panarky »

brainwad wrote: post #237
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…

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.

So if the actual page is defamatory then Google quoting it verbatim is protected.

But if Google accurately summarizes the defamatory page, then the summary is defamatory?

Post reply on HN