Lawsuit Against Google Dismissed

Weather Storm writes in with news from PCWorld that a US District Court judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed against Google by a company that accused them of manipulating search results for political and religious reasons and skewing results in favor of companies that compensate Google financially. The lawsuit (discussed on Slashdot last year) was filed by KinderStart, a parenting information Web site that claims it was illegally blocked from Google search results. The judge not only dismissed the lawsuit but granted a motion by Google to sanction KinderStart and one of its lawyers. Google can now seek "reasonable compensation" for attorney fees because KinderStart's lawyer filed claims that were factually baseless and did not perform an adequate investigation before filing the lawsuit.

Comments

Go to your room!

[Seumas]

The lawsuit was filed by KinderStart, a parenting information Web site that claims it was illegally blocked from Google search results. So the judge ruled in Google's favor and decided they could seek damages against KinderStart . . . for acting like a bunch of babies.

Not far enough

[xigxag]

So KinderStart's case was dismissed because they didn't have any evidence? All well and good, but I would've preferred a ruling that said even if they could substantiate their claims, that they were not entitled to any damages.

I mean, so what if Google skews their search results? They aren't under any obligation to link to the whole web or to do so in an objective manner.

Re:Not far enough

[Kadin2048]

Actually the judge's ruling went about as far as the judge was in a position to go.

Kinderstart didn't have any claims that had merit, so there wasn't really a possibility of creating any new precedent or caselaw. They judge just tossed the whole thing out, and then as a bonus, said they were so ridiculously bad, that Kinderstart should have known not to bring such a steaming pile into the courtroom, in the first place.

In order to 'go any further,' Kinderstart would have needed to have a claim with a modicum of merit, which they didn't.

I guess maybe you can hope that someone smarter will sue Google for the same thing tomorrow, but I think they're probably just happy for the moment.

Re:Not far enough

[iminplaya]

It would put an end to the other type of suit that Google continually faces.

And it would put a bunch of lawyers out of work. What are you? Some kind of commie?

Re:Not far enough

[BruceCage]

Why doesn't Google just sue itself and set precedent?

Imagine if NewsMedia Had To Do This!

[SRA8]

Skewing coverage and results? Imagine if the US News Media had to abide by such rules -- we wouldnt have 24hr coverage of the latest girl being kidnapped. Perhaps we could actually get news on world events, aside from that "World in 30 seconds" segment.

Re:Imagine if NewsMedia Had To Do This!

[Seumas]

Sure we'd have 24 hour coverage of girls being kidnapped. They'd just have to show other girls who aren't blond haired, blue eyed, attractive and from affluent families.

Wait, maybe I missed something

[malkir]

I RTFA'd, and checking out KinderStart.com I noticed that KinderStart is just a search engine *for kids*, meaning that they remove things that they believe are not 'ok' for children to see...
...and their bitching about Google skewing their search results?

Haha

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuck. Can I sue them for removing search results?

Something in the water

[Umuri]

Judges are starting to make sense and get onto companies for being legal morons.... Where are they comming from and what are they putting in the water in that city?

Well, Google Can Sue Them

[FeldBum]

No, but Google can sue them. They even have evidence:

http://www.kinderstart.com/cgi-bin/sqlsearch.cgi?p os=1&query=google&language=&advanced=&urlonly=&wit hid=

They have been removed from KinderStart's search engine, in violation of their first amendment right to free speech!