This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
All AI companies ahould have this liability. They know without a shadow of a doubt that they can't make the AI stop hallucinating. This should have never been released to the public until they fixed this glaring problem.
Or, you know, Google could go back to its link-ranking system for now until it figures out how to keep AI from hallucinating.
AI is still premature. Experimental. It should be regarded as such, like an early-access game.
Has there ever been a litigation that Google has lost that they didn't appeal if appeal were available?
If you had basically unlimited money, wouldn't you also appeal everything that you don't like?
It's the same with all the other big companies as well...
Certainly. But what I mean is, anyone who gave this even a second thought upon hearing they lost in court would assume they would appeal. This isn't news so much as it's a forgone conclusion.
It seems obvious to me that there's a huge gap between a search result, which is a link and an excerpt where the operator of the linked site is clearly responsible for the content, and an AI overview, which mixes information from multiple sources with generated nonsense.
Google should absolutely be liable if it generates overviews containing defamatory lies.
It is not user submitted. These shitresults are made by Google, by their servers. They chose to put it there, knowing it may be inaccurate. So they are fully responsible.
This. 100x.
We had answer snippets long before they shit this abomination into existence. I hope they lose horribly and Germany goes for the hat trick and drops a: "oh! while you're doing that you'll need to remove those false results that are ads... or need to CLEARLY label them."
I can dream.
I actually want to find out how Google will get out of this one. Without any type of lobbying. Even in the u.s ai search promp resualts are technically considered Googles own speech and they are legally responsible. Sadly no one in government seems interested in enforcing ai and even where there is there is this push to take the power from the states to regulate ai.
Google said it takes swift actions against violations of its policies for AI Overviews.
LOL Hasn't it just been proven right here in this case that the opposite is true?
If I have read the verdict properly, even after being officially noticed and legally requested to stop the offending statements, the company did not react at all and the AI repeated it's crap.
"Swift" is a meaningless PR term. If they release a slightly less buggy updated Gemini 9 months later they can call it "rapid innovation" or whatever.
But they cannot choose their own arbitrary waiting time when legal actions are already ongoing.
They're a trillion dollar company, they can do whatever the fuck they want as long as the penalty remains fines.
They're a trillion dollar company, they can do whatever the fuck they want as long as the penalty remains fines.
This was one verdict, and from now on they can be fined up to 250k for every time when their AI writes this offensive statement, provoked or not. Note: not every day, but every single time it happens somewhere.
If they don't do anything about it, then there might come more such verdicts about other similarly offensive statements, and then imagine some people provoke them all repeatedly, systematically...
Can they still ignore them all and do nothing as long as the fuck they want?? ;-)
Or they link to the real sources that might be incorrect to shift the blame, but then those sources can charge for using their data what's even worse in the AI scraping era.
