It sounds like Google is in the right here. Australian courts had already set precedent that individuals are responsible for the content that they post online. Now they're trying to force Google...
It sounds like Google is in the right here. Australian courts had already set precedent that individuals are responsible for the content that they post online. Now they're trying to force Google (and any other companies) to take down anything anyone finds objectionable? That's completely bonkers.
That's a little different, this would mean that Google should take down anything anybody states is incorrect without any ability to check if that is the case. So let's say someone rightly gives...
That's a little different, this would mean that Google should take down anything anybody states is incorrect without any ability to check if that is the case. So let's say someone rightly gives you a bad review you can just claim it's false and then Google has to delete it? That's insane.
Correct, however the Australian courts are now stating that Google can be held liable for damages for things that their users post in direct opposition to previous precedent. What that means is...
Correct, however the Australian courts are now stating that Google can be held liable for damages for things that their users post in direct opposition to previous precedent. What that means is that if anyone tells Google to take something down that they claim defames them and Google doesn't then Google could face paying monetary damages along with the court order for removal. That means it would always be in Google's ( or any other companies) best interest to immediately remove anything anybody claims is defamatory. For instance if I didn't like what someone said about me on tildes the site owner could be guilty of defamation in Australia and would have to pay damages if they didn't remove the offending content immediately after receiving notice from a plantiff.
It sounds like Google is in the right here. Australian courts had already set precedent that individuals are responsible for the content that they post online. Now they're trying to force Google (and any other companies) to take down anything anyone finds objectionable? That's completely bonkers.
That's a little different, this would mean that Google should take down anything anybody states is incorrect without any ability to check if that is the case. So let's say someone rightly gives you a bad review you can just claim it's false and then Google has to delete it? That's insane.
Correct, however the Australian courts are now stating that Google can be held liable for damages for things that their users post in direct opposition to previous precedent. What that means is that if anyone tells Google to take something down that they claim defames them and Google doesn't then Google could face paying monetary damages along with the court order for removal. That means it would always be in Google's ( or any other companies) best interest to immediately remove anything anybody claims is defamatory. For instance if I didn't like what someone said about me on tildes the site owner could be guilty of defamation in Australia and would have to pay damages if they didn't remove the offending content immediately after receiving notice from a plantiff.
Earlier in the article it does state that other plantiffs in other cases prior to that have won cases against individuals for posts they had made.