Hong Kong court permits local tycoon to sue Google for defamatory autocomplete suggestions

Himanshu Arora

Posts: 902   +7
Staff

A Hong Kong court has ruled that a local entertainment tycoon can go ahead with his defamation lawsuit against Google over its autocomplete results suggesting that he is linked to the city’s notorious criminal gangs.

A Google search in both English and Chinese for Albert Yeung Sau-shing automatically adds words like "triad", a commonly used term for organized crime gangs in China, in autocomplete suggestions.

Yeung filed the lawsuit after Google refused to remove these defamatory suggestions that popped up with searches on his name. The businessman, who owns an entertainment company that not only produces films but also manages some of the city's biggest celebrities, is demanding compensation, arguing that the suggestions have adversely affected his reputation.

hong kong google lawsuit search defamation autocomplete court sue

On the other hand, Google argued that the company is not responsible for these suggestions as they are generated by a computer algorithm based on the terms that people frequently search for.

"The entire basis of the internet will be compromised if search engines are required to audit what can be assessed by users using their search tools," said Google's lawyer Gerard McCoy.

The lawyers instead suggested Yeung to ask the websites where the defamatory information was published to remove it. The company also said that the court did not have personal jurisdiction over it.

Unimpressed with the argument, Judge Marlene Ng said that the search giant had the ability to censor material. She also said that the company “recombines and aggregates” information and can hence be legally regarded as a publisher, which means that it can be sued for defamation.

The news comes three months after the European Union's top court ruled that Google must respect the “right to be forgotten” by removing irrelevant and outdated information about individuals on request.

Permalink to story.

 
Why would the courts wish to limit such searches? Is it illegal to wonder if someone with whom you may do business has any negative indications in his background? Shouldn't the value of finding no such negative or, if negative, from an unreliable source far outweigh the potential damage which arises from a search conclusion that many folks have wondered about an issue? The subject of this search should be comforted that (hopefully) there is no damning result to this search. Inquiring parties will take this as a positive.

Also, I am quite uncertain of Judge Ng's thoughts on 'recombines and aggregates'. The bland result of a search is not a false report though there may be false reports in the result.
 
I hope he looses his case big time. People will resort to all sorts of clandestine methods to try make a little extra cash from the industry giants. He should be pleased he's associated with the Triads then people will know not to mess about with him and he could also wind up becoming notorious.
 
So because tons of people searched about him as a triad, hes balling his eyes out at some court because he wants it removed... what a cry baby.

Next up: Google sue Hong Kong local tycoon for being too much of a baby, the court rules Local tycoon must never enter the business occupation ever again.
 
Yet another attack on Google. I have always had the opinion that Google is pretty well-intentioned in everything they try to innovate even if they do occasionally cross the line when it comes to privacy. And if they do cross a line and legal action is required, well I'm all for that. Some issues need to be hashed out in the court of law and the process shouldn't necessarily reflect bad on Google for it. Things are not always black and white. But this story, this lawsuit is just such a waste of time. And its a shame that some judges can be paid off so criminals can sue a contributing organization of the international community.
 
Don't use Google then, try Bing, or DuckDuckGo or some other search site or better yet don't use any search engine, just type in random ip addresses and discover the internet yourself.
 
Hey, after 1997 Hong Kong is no more a place of British colony, it's a China colony and things will do it in the China way, it's just a fact that freedom of speech is control by the government. Don't expect any logical behavior still exist.
 
Back