Google provides the safe browsing API to the browsers. So if anything, websites will have to sue the browser makers. However, browsers don't have any contractua

Google provides the safe browsing API to the browsers. So if anything, websites will have to sue the browser makers. However, browsers don't have any contractual obligation to the websites. Seriously. It's a user agent. So if anyone is going to sue browsers, users have to sue or some government. Users won't sue as long as there's no meaningful harm to the users. And there's essentially no meaningful harm to the users by dropping a single site. As a user, I don't care if any particular site hosts a malware and gets blocked - that's what I want. If that site gets back slowly, I don't care either. That's the website owner's loss. Government doesn't have standing to sue, as long as there's no discriminatory effect - and as long as the selection criteria is fair (malware/phishing), and they are not negligent in fixing false positives, government will have hard time finding a leg to sue. It comes down to - as a society, safe browsing APIs are critically important and they have been working reasonably well. You'll have to show they are mismanaging, or malicious, or doing damages to the users. There's no evidence for any of those.