4 ms·

I'm curious, is a TV station liable for content of Syndicated shows, or commercials or all the other content it did not produce but choose to show? Are newspap

I'm curious, is a TV station liable for content of Syndicated shows, or commercials or all the other content it did not produce but choose to show? Are newspapers liable for the quotes they print? I thought not, and that is why they always so careful about saying "it was reported" or "so said who and who" to make clear any quotes were not coming from the paper and so they weren't liable. A search result is even less than a quote. Autosuggest, hmmmm. Can't google sue for defamation for this statement by Dr Janice Duffy “... I beat the bastards,” or this one "... Google can’t come into our country, destroy reputations and get away with it.” Both are defamatory and the first is patently false (maybe so much so it then doesn't count as defamation) the second though is certainly debatable and plausibly harmful to Google.

gilgoomesh 11y ago
TV stations are certainly liable for content they didn't produce but choose to show. Newspapers can be liable for simply repeating a quote but newsworthiness is a valid defence, provided the context is reporting rather than promoting the opinion. The question in Google's case is whether the choices applied in their search algorithm constitute promotional choices or whether the engine is merely a robot reporting on available content. I personally think the court is wrong here but promoting versus reporting is the question in play.
- njharman 11y ago
  Thanks for answer. So were is the line drawn? Is a book shop liable for the content of the news papers they choose sell? Am I liable for a visible, slanderous headline from newspaper I carry on subway? If network chooses to prioritize traffic (i.e. anti-net-neutrality) are they then liable for content of that traffic?
s73v3r 11y ago
"I'm curious, is a TV station liable for content of Syndicated shows, or commercials or all the other content it did not produce but choose to show?" Well, they chose to show it. So yes.

gilgoomesh 11y ago

TV stations are certainly liable for content they didn't produce but choose to show. Newspapers can be liable for simply repeating a quote but newsworthiness is a valid defence, provided the context is reporting rather than promoting the opinion. The question in Google's case is whether the choices applied in their search algorithm constitute promotional choices or whether the engine is merely a robot reporting on available content. I personally think the court is wrong here but promoting versus reporting is the question in play.

njharman 11y ago
Thanks for answer. So were is the line drawn? Is a book shop liable for the content of the news papers they choose sell? Am I liable for a visible, slanderous headline from newspaper I carry on subway? If network chooses to prioritize traffic (i.e. anti-net-neutrality) are they then liable for content of that traffic?

s73v3r 11y ago

"I'm curious, is a TV station liable for content of Syndicated shows, or commercials or all the other content it did not produce but choose to show?" Well, they chose to show it. So yes.