Slashdot Mirror


Germany's Former First Lady Sues Google

quax writes "Bettina Wulff faces an uphill battle for her reputation. Her husband had to resign as Germany's president due to corruption allegations and has many detractors. Apparently some of them started a character assassination campaign against his wife. At least that is, if you trust serious journalists who looked into the matter and stated that it is made up. Unfortunately though for Bettina Wulff, the rumors took off on the Internet. Now whenever you enter her name Google suggest the additional search terms 'prostitute' and 'escort.' Google refuses to alter its search index."

44 of 164 comments (clear)

  1. European law takes these things seriously by Mr.+Kinky · · Score: 3, Funny

    Google should rethink their position. They should know that when and/or if they break European libel laws, then they absolutely

    1. Re:European law takes these things seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      The whole bottle ?

    2. Re:European law takes these things seriously by schaiba · · Score: 5, Funny

      Google should rethink their position. They should know that when and/or if they break European libel laws, then they absolutely

      ...will forget to finish their sentence.

    3. Re:European law takes these things seriously by C0R1D4N · · Score: 4, Funny

      If the EU really wants to force the issue, google can just threaten to withdraw from Europe. We will see how well that goes over with the people.

    4. Re:European law takes these things seriously by verbatim · · Score: 5, Funny

      If it's libel to say that "when searching for X, people have commonly searched for X+Y" where Y is unkind towards X, then you may want to rethink your notion of libel. If Europeans don't like free speech, then they absolutely

      --
      Price, Quality, Time. Pick none. What, you thought you had a choice?
    5. Re:European law takes these things seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      accidentally

    6. Re:European law takes these things seriously by Joce640k · · Score: 2

      Que pesar

      What to weigh?

      --
      No sig today...
    7. Re:European law takes these things seriously by puto · · Score: 4, Informative

      Que pesar means, what a shame, or what a burden. Pesar has more uses than weigh.

      --
      The Revolution Will Not Be Televised
    8. Re:European law takes these things seriously by slashmydots · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't know if you and she know this but Google isn't hosting the content. They're just showing you that other websites are hosting the content. If she wants to go rage around the internet like a psychobitch, she should target the websites hosting the content. If they're gone, the listings magically disappear from Google too! Wow, amazing! Google makes exactly the opposite of a claim that what they're listing in their search results is guaranteed truthful fact so she should shut up and learn how the internet works.

    9. Re:European law takes these things seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Germany not wanting to remember the holocaust,

      Are you out of your mind? The only nation on earth where you are more reminded of the Holocaust on every possible occasion is Israel.

      You know very little about the real world.

    10. Re:European law takes these things seriously by gnasher719 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Hmmm, do I see a pattern, Germany not wanting to remember the holocaust,

      Excuse me? Where do you get that shit from?

    11. Re:European law takes these things seriously by mypalmike · · Score: 2

      It is not libelous to claim that "When people search for Bettina Wullf, they often search for 'Bettina Wulff prostitute'" if it is factual. That is the only claim google makes as inferred from its search engine. Facts are not libelous, and if you think they are, then you are absolutely

      --
      There are 0x40000000 types of people: those who understand 32-bit IEEE 754 floating point, and those who don't.
    12. Re:European law takes these things seriously by Hatta · · Score: 2

      Clear to who? Is Google responsible for making even the stupidest understand what their algorithms do?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    13. Re:European law takes these things seriously by Tom · · Score: 4, Insightful

      *sigh*

      It's getting old.

      Any CEO who pulled such a stunt would be kicked out and sued into oblivion before the ink is dry. Europe is bigger than the US, you don't pull out of there unless you have a business suicide wish.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    14. Re:European law takes these things seriously by Tom · · Score: 5, Informative

      Germany not wanting to remember the holocaust

      Please take your pills again, otherwise you'll write more nonsense.

      If you grow up in Germany, you will get fed everything about the holocaust until you are sick of it. It will be the topic of (mandatory) history class for at least half a year, usually one year.

      There's stuff on TV about the holocaust every week. There's lots of books in the history section of book stores.

      The jewish lobby organisations have a massive influence, and if you want to kill a political topic dead, all you need to do is find a convincing way to link it to the holocaust. For example, there's a current discussion regarding the legality of circumcision for religious purposes. We're not talking about something done by a doctor in a hospital under anesthesia, but about the religious ceremony where some priest cuts of a part of your dick as a child without any painkillers. A court recently ruled that strictly speaking, that is assault. There was an uproar within Germany because both muslims and jews do that to their kids. In the media, the jewish position takes headlines, while the muslim position is rarely mentioned. There are about 200,000 jews in Germany, but 3.6 million muslims. Jewish speakers seriously said that this court decision "is the worst thing that happened to judaism in Germany since the holocaust".

      Israel is more likely to forget about the holocaust than Germany is.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    15. Re:European law takes these things seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The former German president was married and divorced his first wife and then married Bettina.
      The current German president is married but seperated, but not divorced, from his wife and living with his girlfriend.
      The foreign affairs minister is openly gay.
      The family affairs minister got her first child while in office.

      I just tried to imagine this in the US, the heads of conservatives would explode.
      BTW Germany currently has a conservative government.

    16. Re:European law takes these things seriously by arose · · Score: 2

      If the results are to be speech (and protected accordingly), they certainly can be libel as well. If not, you are the one who needs to rething your notion of libel.

      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
    17. Re:European law takes these things seriously by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2

      He probably chose to not be reminded of the real world.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    18. Re:European law takes these things seriously by kill-1 · · Score: 2

      A gay, a Vietnamese, a guy in a wheelchair, and an elderly East German woman walk into to a bar. "You're a funny bunch," says the bartender. "No, we're the German government."

    19. Re:European law takes these things seriously by Tom · · Score: 4, Informative

      To be fair, there'd be quite a few more Jews if your relatives hadn't murdered them.

      One, yes, though not as many as you probably assume. The official number is 570.000 - most of those murdered were in Poland and other invaded countries.

      Two, my grandfather was murdered by the Nazis for being a member of the german resistance. So shut the fuck up.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    20. Re:European law takes these things seriously by Tom · · Score: 2

      I'm sorry, but you do have no idea.

      First, yes as someone pointed out, Google not only has offices in Germany (more than one, I think), it actually has a german subsidiary. Yes, that could be moved, however, it is almost certainly the legal partner of all existing contracts, which makes things quite a bit more complicated than moving a few small offices.

      Second, Germany is part of the EU which has a common market and quite a bit more. If you think you can move just across the border and you're out of reach, you are very mistaken.

      Could you imagine the uproar the German government would face from their own companies because now they are at a disadvantage compared to the rest of the world?

      Pffft. Here's what Germany exports:
      http://www.bpb.de/wissen/MVCEI4,0,0,Import_und_Export_nach_Waren.html
      (if you don't speak german, the three big bars are cars, machinery and chemicals)

      How much of that is dependent on Google advertisement? Which, btw., makes up at best 10% of the German advertisement business, so let's not pretend it would make such a huge difference. Google would suffer more than Germany.

      Why should Germany's first lady receive special treatment?

      She shouldn't. This isn't about special treatment, it's about whether or not Google needs to abide by the local laws. If the courts agree with her, then it's not special treatment because anyone in the same position would have the same right.

      Can anyone then demand google censor their results if something "bad" is said about them? Yeah, that's a slippery slope that I expect they'd be willing to not want to step on.

      Which is why we have courts that are willing to do so, because someone has to. We can't all go around our lives avoiding any slipperly slopes that may or may not be there.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  2. And why should they? by Unknown1337 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Google suggest is an interpretive algorithm using common searches, and mass information to 'guess' what you or many other people might be wanting to search for. If the information is out there or people commonly search a topic it SHOULD appear as a possible option. The words probably should be censored for the vast audience possible, but it's the source information that is at fault, not Google for collecting it.

    1. Re:And why should they? by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I don't think Google is as hands off as you say. I just typed Mitt Romney in the search box and I got:

      "Mitt Romney on issues"
      "Mitt Romney vp"
      "Mitt Romney tax returns"
      "Mitt Romney wiki"

      Judging by the commercials on television, I'd expect at Google to at least suggest some non-flattering search terms.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    2. Re:And why should they? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That'd be a fair and nice argument if they would apply these rules across the board. But there's quite a few cases where they've caved already, most notably to the lobbying from the entertainment industry. So they're at least making a statement that as an individual, you shouldn't expect them to alter their search index, but as a powerful corporate lobby, you can do what you please.

    3. Re:And why should they? by antifoidulus · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yeah, but it's Germany, the masters on requiring certificates for everything.... A friend of mine was almost sued for reviewing a hotel in Germany. In his review he stated that there were bedbugs in the hotel he stayed at, and the hotel threatened to sue him. Not because they deny he saw bugs, but because they claimed he didn't have the proper qualifications to determine if the bugs in question were actually bedbugs or not..... They eneded up not going to court, but my friend had to hire a lawyer and they settled out of court, he was forced to remove his review. Only in Germany.....

    4. Re:And why should they? by Unknown1337 · · Score: 2

      Somewhat true, Google has bowed to lawsuits and pressure in the past on their search suggestions, but they only list 4 options, which are supposed to be the most highly requested/available (both historical and taking current trends into consideration). In an attempt to make searching more 'convenient'. In another week or so due to the ads I would expect those sorts of terms to break the top 4.

    5. Re:And why should they? by moronoxyd · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Considdering that there are lots of websites where Germans rate hotels, restaurants and the like and tell their experience, and I don't hear a lot about all those people and websites getting sued, I guess that your friend was very unlucky. Or maybe the situation was a little mor complicated than what you told us.

    6. Re:And why should they? by Greyfox · · Score: 2

      I'd say ANY bugs in your bed in a hotel is grounds for a bad review! "Oh, I'm sorry! What I thought were bedbugs were actually Asian hissing cockroaches! I couldn't hear them hissing over the sound my wife screaming 'OH MY GOD THERE ARE BUGS IN THE BED!'" It was an honest mistake!

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  3. Google missed an opportunity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    instead of just suggesting search terms like prostitute and escort, why not also mention the fees ?

  4. It's even worse... by srussia · · Score: 5, Funny

    Turns out Bettina Wulff is Barbara Streisand's half-sister!

    --
    Set your phasers on "funky"!
    1. Re:It's even worse... by prefec2 · · Score: 2

      Nope. She is just promoting her book and her new promotion company. She had to something like this, because otherwise no one in Germany would have noticed that she "wrote" a book. All the tree-killing would have been a waste of time without that promotion ;-)

  5. Re:Germany's 'what'? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I think they meant "first lady" as "the escort he chooses by default".

  6. Google is Sometimes Hypocritical by jellie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm not so sure I would agree with Google's typical defense on this issue, which is that they have an algorithm that automatically ranks all the search results and they can't change that. Except they manually change the results. When companies break their rules, they can punish them. For example, when BMW's German website was found to influence results, Google banned them from their index. An eyeglass company, DecorMyEyes, verbally abused its customers to generate bad reviews ... and more publicity. After being published in The Times, they dropped the company from the index. Even in the Santorum case, they eventually made some results less prominent. Google has also been accused of pushing up the rankings of its own products. So it's kinda hypocritical to say that Google doesn't adjust individual results.

    1. Re:Google is Sometimes Hypocritical by squiggleslash · · Score: 2

      Even in the Santorum case, they eventually made some results less prominent

      They did? The first search result on the word "Santorum" is for the Wikipedia page on the Santorum neologism. The second, reasonably enough, is for the homophobic jackwagon himself. The third is the "Spreading santorum" blog.

      After that you get links largely about the politician. The fact that the first link is still about the fluid, despite the fact Santorum spent most of the last year and a bit in an election campaign for president, suggests to me Google hasn't done anything. (Which is fine, I'm not criticising them, I just think they're not as hands on as you think.)

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    2. Re:Google is Sometimes Hypocritical by cheesybagel · · Score: 2

      There are also the DMCA pulldowns. So yes folks Google already messes with their index. All the time.

  7. Google is already censoring the auto-complete by tempmpi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Google is already censoring the auto-complete, just for other reasons:

    It will not suggest "adobe photoshop torrent" or "adobe photoshop crack", even though that these searches and similar searches are extremly popular. And it will not autocomplete "Rocco" to "Rocco Siffredi". So google is censoring auto-complete against piracy and against pornography, why exactly shouldn't it do the same thing to protect people against libel?

    --
    Jan
    1. Re:Google is already censoring the auto-complete by Whatanut · · Score: 2

      Is this a thing now? Where we just

      --

      yvan eht nioj
    2. Re:Google is already censoring the auto-complete by Nemyst · · Score: 2

      Because whatever you think of filtering against piracy or pornography (I don't like either, but I can understand the latter for young children), it's fairly clear cut and simple to know what is piracy and what is pornography.

      How do you quantitatively define libel? Do you just remove anything that anybody claims is libel against them? That'll work just fine, right?

  8. Re:Reverse Streisand effect by aaaaaaargh! · · Score: 5, Interesting

    a reverse Streisand effect. Surely a person everybody calls bad can't be that bad?

    What annoys me most about this debate is that there are so many people who apparently think that having worked as a prostitute/sex worker is so very bad and would somehow disqualify a woman from being the first lady. People and the boulevard press in Germany even went so far as to take the first lady's mature attitude towards better sexual education at schools as a clear sign of having been a prostitute, as if any of that constituted any real problem (rather than, say, hypocrisy or the moronic politics of her husband).

  9. Re:Reverse Streisand effect by Hatta · · Score: 2

    What annoys me most about this debate is that there are so many people who apparently think that having worked as a prostitute/sex worker is so very bad and would somehow disqualify a woman from being the first lady.

    I'd argue that being the first lady is so very bad that it should disqualify a person from being a sex worker.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  10. Re:Reverse Streisand effect by lcam · · Score: 3, Funny

    I consider prostitutes to be more honest than politicians, at least you get what want, then you pay with prostitutes. Politicians hike taxes and then don't deliver on their promises.

    I think Bettina Wulff is taking a step down the ladder with her attitude, especially in the name of politics.

  11. Re:WTF are you talking about? by maroberts · · Score: 2

    Actually I think you will find most Brits concede that Maradona's second goal was spectacular.
    Unlike the Argentinians, we're generally gracious when defeated fairly... :-P

    --

    Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
    Karma: Chameleon

  12. Nothing but a marketing scheme for her new book by demon+driver · · Score: 5, Interesting

    And it couldn't be more evident. Just two things:

    1. The event in discussion now dates back half a year. When it was news, Mr Wulff was still Federal President (an office which, in Germany, does not carry too much power; his main job is to represent the state) and struggling against the corruption allegations which finally made him resign. Back then, when it was urgent, Mrs Wulff did not deem it necessary to do or say anything at all.

    2. This week there is a book by Mrs Wulff coming to the stores titled "Jenseits des Protokolls" ("Beyond Protocol"), which is expected to tell a few stories from the couple of months her husband was President, including, of course, the events she is now suing Google for.

    Any questions?

    All this is of course exactly in line with what those Wulff people have already shown to be their character.

  13. Re:WTF are you talking about? by Pf0tzenpfritz · · Score: 2

    Fuckyeah! And everyone in Germany is proud about Bettina Wu... no, wait - what was the question, again?

    --
    Oh, the beautiful gloss of greality!