decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
It is in australia if google publish it | 217 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
It is in australia if google publish it
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 29 2012 @ 06:31 AM EST
It is not Google's job to suppress even falsehoods on the net, let alone truth. Google shouldn't take down MY website just because YOU (or some third world tinpot dictator) thinks it offensive to your (or his) dignity.
It actually is if they're challenged on something under defamation law in Australia. Relaying something someone else posted is *not* a defence either, but the statements being true is (there's a whole bunch of others that probably aren't relevant in this situation). Basically it has to be untrue, damaging, published (publically), identifiable (eg not anonymous) and presented as fact (not opinion) to be a defamation issue. For example, the completely hypothetical statement "this guy is just exploiting a dumb law to get a paycheck" is defamatory, whereas "I think this guy is exploiting a dumb law to get a paycheck" is safer (companies/rich individuals will still probably drag you through court over the latter, but they'll almost certainly lose). Now I don't want to defend our defamation laws - they're generally acknowledged to be a problem, but saying it's not Google's job to obey the law in countries it operates in strikes me as a dangerous position. Some laws are stupid - this is one, but I'm not sure a world where corporate America dictates law (anymore than it does already!) would be a better one.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )