Google's Autocomplete Dilemma: Every Concession Makes It Easier For The Next Person To Complain
from the infringement-vs.-defamation dept
Back when Google decided to be the arbiter of what words were strictly for infringement in its previously useful autocomplete function, some of us saw the looming danger of such a move, in that it opens up Google to requests for all kinds of autocomplete modifications. The theory was that Google could placate movie studios and record labels by refusing to let autocomplete add words like "torrent" to searches, because lord knows that there isn't a legitimate use for those damned things.But the problem with the permission culture is that it lives by that old adage: give an inch and they will take a mile. So, as was inevitable, what began with "torrent" and media files soon became fights over autocompletes like "jew" and non-infringing search results. And, as Google opens the door another inch each time it caves in, the floodgates continue to threaten. It would be problematic for Google to assert selective moderation of autocomplete. If they will block autocomplete terms for media files, why not defamation? If they'll block defaming terms, why not parodies? If they'll block parodies, why not controversial negative articles?
That's how we've arrived in a world where the wife of a disgraced former German President is suing Google because autocomplete offers suggestions like "escort" and "prostitute" to complete a search of her name. Bettina Wulff is the wife of Christian Wulff, who resigned the Presidency amid allegations of corruption earlier in his career. For whatever reason, there have long been rumors that she had a colorful past and those rumors spread like wildfire on the internet.
"My pseudonym is supposedly 'Lady Victoria' and my workplace was apparently an establishment called 'Chateau Osnabrück,'" Wulff writes, according to Bild. She continues: "I have never worked as escort." The rumors have been very hurtful for her and her family, Wulff writes, describing her concern that her young son Leander might discover the speculation while surfing the Internet.Wulff, working with her lawyers, has successfully sent a myriad of cease and desist notices to bloggers and television personalities, some of them quite well known in Germany. Assuming the allegations are as false as she claims, that's all good. But now she's bringing Google into the mix because autocomplete...you know...works the way it's supposed to.
But last week they took on Internet giant Google too, filing a defamation suit with the Hamburg district court to force the search engine to remove a long list of damaging terms recommended by its "Autocomplete" function in connection with Wulff. Google, which has refused to comply, claims that the search suggestions are simply the result of an algorithm. The company seems confident about the lawsuit, having won similar cases in court with claims that the search engine only reflects what people search for most often online.But... thanks to Google's double standard in editing for copyright, it's making it easy for some to argue that it should also do the same for stories like this one:
Simply put, Google's position is this: In response to pressure from a powerful lobby, the company will block search terms and hits, forcing undesirable results lower on their list of links. But when it comes to individual people, Google unscrupulously links users to websites that violate their personal rights.Whether or not you agree those claims are accurate, you can't deny that Google made such arguments much, much easier when it started editing autocompletes and search results in favor of copyright holders.
[....]It would appear that Google's position on intervening in search results and suggestions depends on the influence of the parties involved. It hides links to pirated material, but not those that violate personal rights, and it places links to its own products prominently in its supposedly objective results.
Google appears to choose what is objectionable based on what might be bad for business. The company may well come through Bettina Wulff's suit legally unscathed. But ethically, questions will remain. Google's choices in the matter seem opportunistic. Given the quasi-monopolist's powerful position in the market, that is unsettling.
Despite what I think is a common sense notion that Google shouldn't need to bend its autocomplete algorithm under notions of comfort, the fact that it's opened the door to doing this before will make replying to this and other suits more problematic. A Google spokesperson is quoted in the article saying that the company won't give in this time because its autocomplete suggestions are objective. That may have once been the case, but it simply isn't any more.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: autocomplete, bettina wulff, defamation, double standard, edited results, germany, search
Companies: google
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
On a side note and for my enlightenment: Jew? Is it a bad word? What's the English word for that group?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I guess this is pretty much the same issue with Jap/Japanese. I sincerely use Jap with affection in the sense I both like the Japanese and their culture generally speaking. And yet I've been scorned for using it because of WWII incidents. Makes no sense, why keep something that happened in the past interfere with today?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I like Japanese people and culture too, but "Jap" and "Nip" were the terms we used in WWII, and are (to me) inseparable from the idea of the Japanese as the enemies in that war-- and the more of them you can kill in a day the better. I will use those words in that context, but the idea of using them to refer to anyone or anything today makes me shudder.
I hope that doesn't make me sound like a hypocrite!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Some people think so.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Media sells search/hardware/etc, so these tech giants capitulate [likely grumpily, but with large stacks of cash].
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I mean, what company caters to an industry which then turns and sues them anyway, leaving a gaping hole like this to be a problem?
Their motto of "Don't be evil" obviously never reached the desks of those who are now trying to force what an auto-complete option will do next.
Personally, there is one thing I've noticed: Google has gotten too big for itself. Just as with any company with such power, it seems absolutely inevitable they destroy every element which made them popular in the first place.
Not only do they filter their auto-complete lists, but image returns as well (while comically stating some were removed by DMCA notices which can be read at chillingeffect.org).
I believe Google's setting itself up to allow a competitor to try its hand at being a search engine. The company which does it first with "Search in retail or search on the web" will win.
Damn, am I sick and tired of Google returning nothing but retail crap after "wikipedia" or "imdb" results.
I'd insert an eye rolling icon, but TD doesn't offer me the option.
;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
What Google should have done when the RIAA+MPAA came along insisting that they filter autocomplete is to instead put a hefty disclaimer/explanation of exactly what autocomplete *is*. Of course they'd sue anyway, but they'd have a tough time getting a court to say "No, Google, you cannot legally state that fact".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If 10,000 news stories relates your name with child molester, you can be sure the auto-complete will pick it up as it was written.
I don't imagine Google has a whole building filled with employees in a meeting discussing how auto-completes should fill when asking why there are only 8 buns for every 10 hot dog packages.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Google's autocomplete doesn't make suggestions, and if they are going to continue the service, it should work as it was intended to. If the allegations are untrue, it is a shame that people are making these accusations, but none of this is Google's fault or problem.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Finding info
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I always think of it as a way to guide people to the highest paying advertisers, not a way to help them search.
Do away with it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The thing is...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Then if Google were to remove this autocomplete feature altogether, will the complaints redirect to the search results themselves?
And if Google removes this feature, wouldn't we get simply a bunch of FireFox plugins which will do this autocomplete stuff for us, directly from pounding the search results?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The do no evil plugin replaces censored auto complete terms. A pity they couldn't port to Chrome.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We all know what the plan is
Google is facing serious pressure. They will not stand up to this pressure, they will try to compromise, and cave. Let's face it, we need a new search engine. I too have noticed I need to spend more time searching, because Google is fiddling with the order of the search results.
I've also noticed a worrying trend that critical speech is increasingly being lumped together with harassment, trolling and hate speech. More and more, only voicing the official line is acceptable, and voicing a critical opinion is seen as agressive, socially unacceptable behavior.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: We all know what the plan is
http://www.philb.com/webse.htm
I like DuckDuckGo myself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just get rid of Autocomplete -- courtesy of Big Media
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And because lord knows that nobody on the Internet is smart enough to add "torrent" by hand to any search term.
"A Google spokesperson is quoted in the article saying that the company won't give in this time because its autocomplete suggestions are objective. That may have once been the case, but it simply isn't any more."
Google is now a little bit pregnant.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Going by the attempts that copyright holders and enforcers have been having, with their spectacularly atrocious records of collateral damage and complete failure to solve the problem, you'll forgive us if we're somewhat cynical of all further attempts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]