In a ruling this week, a German federal court said Google must restrict information in its autocomplete when it violates personal rights.
The suit, filed by an unnamed man according to the BBC, claimed defamatory autocomplete suggestions on Google.de linked him to fraud and scientology.
The ruling states that if suggestions in autocomplete are untrue, it violates personal rights, and therefore violates the new ruling.
The ruling goes on to say that Google itself is not liable for violating rights, but that it has not taken precautions to prevent data generated by searches that violate rights.
The BBC speculates this new ruling could have bearing on a case brought forth by Germany’s former First Lady, Bettina Wulff, for autocomplete results that suggest she’s linked to prostitution.
Google is often the target for restriction of information. In most cases, individuals or groups say the information is harmful to them in some way.
A U.S. autocomplete suit was filed against Google last year for linking a surgeon to the term “bankrupt” in autocomplete. The plaintiff withdrew the case last month without explanation, according to MediaPost.
In April, a Japanese court fined Google $3,100 for autocomplete suggestions that reportedly linked an innocent man to a crime.
Google recently released data that shows government takedown requests by court order are on the rise, and that Google does comply around 45 percent of the time with U.S. requests.
Legal experts speculate that at least in the U.S., Google would be protected against libel as it relates to autocomplete suits under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, because Google itself is not making the defamatory remarks, rather it’s collecting and presenting the speech of others.
So what do you think: Does censoring autocomplete restrict access to information people have a right to, or is it protecting individuals or groups from defamation that could cause harm?