1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Google loses first amendment suit.

Discussion in 'BlackHat Lounge' started by JustUs, May 18, 2016.

  1. JustUs

    JustUs Power Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    626
    Likes Received:
    582
  2. toml3030

    toml3030 Elite Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    2,127
    Likes Received:
    715
    Sounds like they didn't actually lose the lawsuit, the judge basically said "it's our website and we can do whatever we want on it" wasn't a valid defense.
     
  3. JustUs

    JustUs Power Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    626
    Likes Received:
    582
    I will have to disagree:

    "Meanwhile, in the latest legal dustup in Florida, Google also claimed that like a news outlet, it had the right to publish as it saw fit. Judge Steele did not agree, saying:

    While publishers are entitled to discretion for editorial judgment decisions, plaintiff has alleged that Google’s reason for banning its websites was not based upon “editorial judgments” but instead based upon anti-competitive motives.

    Plaintiff has adequately alleged that it did not violate any of Google’s policies and that the representations made by Google that E-ventures’ pages violate Google’s policies are false. Whether or not plaintiff can support these assertions and carry its burden at a later stage of the proceedings is for a different day. The Court finds that at this stage of the proceedings, the Second Amended Complaint is sufficient to withstand Google’s First Amendment arguments."
    http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...-defense-to-search-censorship-fails-in-court/

    You can read the courts holding at:
    https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/e-venturesruling.pdf

    Quoting in part:
    "As discussed previously, while the Court does agree that Google’s search results can constitute speech and opinions as to the relevance of the search results to a search query, that is not what plaintiff’s tortious interference claim is premised upon. Plaintiff’s tortious interference claim alleges interference dueto Google’s removal of the websites, not necessarily what was communicated by its search results."

    Moving to the final order:
    "Accordingly, the Court denies Google’s Motion to DismissCount IV of plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint.
    Accordingly, it is now

    ORDERED:
    1. Defendant Google's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint and Supporting Memorandum of Law
    (Doc. #78) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.

    Google’s Motion to Dismiss Count III is granted without prejudice; the Motion to Dismiss is otherwise denied.

    2. Defendant shall file a responsive pleading to plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS of this Opinion and Order."
     
  4. Skyebug77

    Skyebug77 Jr. VIP Jr. VIP

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2012
    Messages:
    1,941
    Likes Received:
    1,361
    Occupation:
    Marketing
    Location:
    Portland,Or
    this is actually interesting news
     
  5. toml3030

    toml3030 Elite Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    2,127
    Likes Received:
    715

    You know that getting a motion dismissed and losing a suit are totally different things, right?
     
  6. JustUs

    JustUs Power Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    626
    Likes Received:
    582
    I am very aware of that. I am also aware that it takes quite a bit to withstand a motion to dismiss when the law gives a presumption of first amendment protection. If you would have read the holding that I listed above, you would have seen that.