$200,000 Judgement Against Google In Mokbel Shots Case

niftydude writes with news of damages awarded in a case over Google image search results "Should Google be held liable for images that appear in its search results? An Australian court has said yes. 'A Melbourne man who won a defamation case against search engine giant Google has been awarded $200,000 in damages. Milorad Trkulja, also known as Michael, sued the multinational over images of him alongside a well-known underworld figure that appeared in its search results. A six-person Supreme Court jury found last month that Mr Trkulja had been defamed by the images, which he first contacted Google about removing in 2009.'"

Comments

Re:If it was my company

[jschrod]

I'm not from AUS, so this is 2ndary info.

Some site had misleading info labeling an innocent as criminal.

Said innocent succeeded in getting the site to remove respective material.

Google still delivered incriminating material through its search results.

Complaining to Google didn't help. (As far as it's reported, it seems that represseive dictatorships like China hav no problem complaining to Google and get a reaction; but that course ain't available for a private person.)

Successfully suing Google might get some relief, though I doubt it.

Would you please cite any factual errors in the text above, with references? (I'd like to have references from you and not the other way round, since these are criminal charges, and we all respect innocent-until-proven-guilty, don't we?)

If you aren't able to do this, IMNSHO there is a difference between the original (now deleted) content and the search-engine delivered (still defamotory) content.