MILAN:The service Suggest/Autocomplete of Google, that it helps the search navigators completing the strisce, is not neutral and can concur to the defamation of persons, giving place to a civilistica responsibility of extracontractual nature. The Court of Milan, confirming during claim a provision of urgency of 25 slid January, has ingiunto to the search engine to remove the automatic association of truffatore that on Google search accompanies the financial name of a famous entrepreneur, previewing moreover a penitentiary for every day of delay in the execution of the order.
The precautionary judge had thought that the adjective beside the name of the financier is in itself diffamatorio, even if nobody of documents proposals on the videate ones from the service of Google search then turned out to have a lesivo content. Short-circuit, explained Google in the resource, derives from the fact that the algorithm produces on bases statistics pure the demands for search of the navigators, without some valutativo participation: therefore under no circumstances the host provider never would have come less to the neutrality recognized from (the little) laws on the argument, neither would make never it in order to avoid discrimination dispute.
But both judges of merit have sconfessato the position of the search engine. According to Google the Suggest service does not create terminologiche associations as an example (: Truffatore Tizio ) but finds to them , when instead second the court the software elaborates , thus making own the conclusions offered to the public. And as for the neutrality, Google - that it is a host provider to all the effects - soggiace to the europeee and national rules (31/2000 directive and Dlgs 70/2003) that they bind it not to a control estimate, but successive and a posteriori (and previa signalling of the illicit one) on the result of the operativity of the Suggest service.
The sentence of Milan has affinity and differences with the Yahoo! case, to which the Court of Rome it had tax to remove link to pages where to unload film illegally. Yahoo! the judge had asked a generic removal for link, possible only if the motor is put to supervise on the indexed pages; to Google it has been asked instead only taking part on a precise coupling. There is but a tendency of bottom in the two vicissitudes: the search engines are calls to take part on own functions for protecting some leave. In Europe not still they are obliged to instead remove elements based on a signalling received (in the USA yes), but only on order of a judge. It is possible but that the next version of the directive on the electronic commerce will introduce also in Europe the notice and take down (removal after signalling), than already is applied to the hosting provider.
The precautionary judge had thought that the adjective beside the name of the financier is in itself diffamatorio, even if nobody of documents proposals on the videate ones from the service of Google search then turned out to have a lesivo content. Short-circuit, explained Google in the resource, derives from the fact that the algorithm produces on bases statistics pure the demands for search of the navigators, without some valutativo participation: therefore under no circumstances the host provider never would have come less to the neutrality recognized from (the little) laws on the argument, neither would make never it in order to avoid discrimination dispute.
But both judges of merit have sconfessato the position of the search engine. According to Google the Suggest service does not create terminologiche associations as an example (: Truffatore Tizio ) but finds to them , when instead second the court the software elaborates , thus making own the conclusions offered to the public. And as for the neutrality, Google - that it is a host provider to all the effects - soggiace to the europeee and national rules (31/2000 directive and Dlgs 70/2003) that they bind it not to a control estimate, but successive and a posteriori (and previa signalling of the illicit one) on the result of the operativity of the Suggest service.
The sentence of Milan has affinity and differences with the Yahoo! case, to which the Court of Rome it had tax to remove link to pages where to unload film illegally. Yahoo! the judge had asked a generic removal for link, possible only if the motor is put to supervise on the indexed pages; to Google it has been asked instead only taking part on a precise coupling. There is but a tendency of bottom in the two vicissitudes: the search engines are calls to take part on own functions for protecting some leave. In Europe not still they are obliged to instead remove elements based on a signalling received (in the USA yes), but only on order of a judge. It is possible but that the next version of the directive on the electronic commerce will introduce also in Europe the notice and take down (removal after signalling), than already is applied to the hosting provider.
No comments:
Post a Comment