Google's Tactics Result In Notice To Sue..

[blueairnews]

Google's refusal to take decisive measures to remove what dotWORLDS claims is libelous content from its search engine has caused the Domain Names Registrar to serve notice of its intention to commence an action for defamation and slander.

Despite an agreement by Google to withdraw a number of allegedly defamatory postings from its worldwide search engines, dotWORLDS (www. dotworlds.net) CEO Brian Retkin claims its gestures are "simply token and a continuation of its policy of obstruction and delay."

"In contrast to what many see as a total disregard for the reputation of its users, Google vehemently protects its own privacy," said Retkin. According to a September 4, 2005 story in the Sunday Times Online by Dominic Rusche, a recent public relations fiasco occurred after Google banned its staff from talking to CNet reporters for one year. It transpired that the ban was Google's response to CNet's publication of personal information about Dr. Eric Schmidt, Google's CEO. It was then learned that not only was the information already in the public domain, but the same information about Schmidt was also available on Google's own websites.

With such uncertainty, dotWORLDS may find it difficult to prevail, however it says it plans to fight its case from a new perspective in order to succeed where others have failed.

"If dotWORLDS does succeed, the ramifications for Google could be immense," said Retkin. "Up to nine billion pages could require proper scrutiny, putting Google in need of a larger staff and greater resources to ensure it remains on the right side of the law."

dotWORLDS

www .media-press-release.com /release-16.htm

[Marcia]

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLD,GGLD:2005-11,GGLD:en&q=dotworlds

Better than viagra, even :eek:

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2004/4/prweb117995.htm

and the one about the poor depressed 4 year old with the 93 year old mother

http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:q4ERp6MgUpcJ:www.spambutcher.com/press/klkmq.html+dotworlds&hl=en

[dannysullivan]

Sure would like to see a lot more detail than what's in the skimpy press release about what's alleged, but I can already drive a truck through the holes so far.

Despite an agreement by Google to withdraw a number of allegedly defamatory postings from their Search Engines worldwide, dotWORLDS(www.dotworlds.net (http://www.dotworlds.net)) claims their gestures are simply token and a continuation of their policy of obstruction and delay.
Again, real solid info on the agreement would help. But if we're talking web search, Google can't pull "posting" since it simply indexes what other people are saying on their own individually run web sites. If something's defamatory, you have to go to that source.

Under US law, Google and other search engines do have to act to remove links to copyrighted material, if they receive a formal complaint. It doesn't sound like this is the case.

Google does have its Google Groups service, where it does host content itself. Sounds like maybe this complaint is applicable to that.

The biggest obstacle that dotWORLDS will face is the court's grappling with Google's defence that it has no way to judge what is defamatory and that it cannot be in the position of having to make judicial judgments - which in the defamation area is notoriously difficult, even for a court to make," says Retkin. "This would be coupled with the preeminence of the First Amendment right to freedom of speech which is always given the benefit of the doubt in the USA and which has often proved to be a viable defence in Internet-related cases in recent years.

Um, I'm not a constitutional expert, but there are laws about defamatory speech. The First Amendment provides protection against the US government or governmental bodies in the US from interfering with speech. It does NOT protect the rights of individuals from being sued by other individuals. In short, a statement like just sounds like hype rather than substance.

With such uncertainty, dotWORLDS may find it hard to prevail, however dotWORLDS say they plan to fight this case from a new and different perspective and feel they can succeed where others have failed.
I gather part of this is announcing an intention to sue rather than getting on with it. That's not necessarily unique, of course.

If dotWORLDS does succeed, the ramifications for Google could be immense. With up to 9 billion pages that would require proper scrutiny, Google could find themselves in need of much greater levels of staff and resources simply to ensure they stay on the right side of the law.
And this takes us back to the case seemingly being about Google listing pages that dotWorlds feels are defamatory. They aren't Google's pages. It can't remove them from the web. Only the owners can. On the offchance you prevent Google from listing links to these pages, Yahoo, MSN and Ask Jeeves still will. I note they aren't included in the suit. OK, take them out. Do you then go after anyone who links to these pages?

Let's make it easier. How about requiring Google to review what 6 billion around the world are saying and screen that speech to ensure nothing defamatory is said. I'm sure they'll need much greater levels of staff for that, too.

I think dotWorlds might have much better luck dealing with negative comments about them on the web showing up on search engines by reviewing some of the suggestions in our Dealing With Negative Listings About You (http//forums.searchenginewatch.com/showthread.php?t=8972) thread.

[dannysullivan]

Ah, here's a complaint Dotworld made to Google on Chilling Effects:
http://www.chillingeffects.org/international/notice.cgi?NoticeID=1514

Sadly, it tells us nothing as the entire complaint has been redacted, I'm assuming by Dotworld.