Well, the summary states: > and, because it was on notice that the material was defamatory and refused to remove the information, it could not be found to have

Well, the summary states: > and, because it was on notice that the material was defamatory and refused to remove the information, it could not be found to have innocently circulated the information. So in very least this is not just about linking to something, but about not removing defamatory content when being put on notice. The obligation to respond to requests and remove certain content from a search engine sounds a lot less unreasonable than merely being guilty of linking to something.