Technology

Based.

Can anyone explain how the appeals system works in German courts? I have no idea how the law works in Europe, but it can't be that different from America that there's a chance this could get overturned in appeals, right?

"This slop is not available in your country."

Hahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahaa! YES!

Can we apply the same logic and principle to self driving cars now please and hold the owners of the proprietary software fully and properly responsible for every poor judgement, traffic violation, accident injury and death that happens in self drive mode.

Yes! They are responsible. They're not quoting, they are hallucinating crap they think someone else wrote somewhere.

Excellent. Make platforms with algorithmic feeds count as publishers, too, and you can solve 90% of the world’s problems

All the arguments of "AI doesn't impact copyright because it creates derivative content" were bound to lead here. You can't (or at least shouldn't be able to) have it both ways.

While this is a solid ruling and establishes great precedent, it's in Germany and so likely will only eventually apply to the EU. It would be cool to see a similar decision from a US court.

They'll make them click on a liability agreement every time they try to use it.

This is more important that just AI overviews and establishes that companies are responsible for the editorializing they do. That's much more important in algorithmic suggestions, which drive people into doing things they never would have done otherwise (see: Trump voters).

I hope this stands through all instances and is applied generously, because so many people have been fucked up beyond recognition by following the trail of the algorithm, especially on social and video sites.

Oh woe, we just wanted to give y'all some cool and useful feature!

Just think of it, why would a greedy corporation want to give you a computation-heavy feature for free, for all your everyday searching purposes? One that would be easy to withdraw instead of fighting in courts over it.

Especially if that corporation has full control over specific results served to you on your query

A regular search engine just points to outside websites. But AI overviews generate "independent, new, and substantive statements" by evaluating and combining content from various third-party sites. And only Google can check those statements, the court said, "at least by comparing the underlying third-party websites with its own statements based on them."

Honestly this is all the reasoning you need to infer that Google should be liable. Google alone has editorial control over the summary their AI generates, not the outside sources used to generate these statements, ergo Google should be held liable for that.

At the hearing, Google argued that users could check the linked sources themselves to verify whether the AI summary was correct. Users generally knew "that information generated with AI should not be blindly trusted," the company claimed.

... And you know that's true when the best Google could muster as a defence is to say that people shouldn't be blindly trusting the AI, which ironically means even Google thinks their AI is full of shit.

But unfortunately for Google, not only does the court not buy that defence, but it would appear that's contrary to how most people use the feature.

The ruling may also have international reach, according to the court.

I seriously hope so. Its about time companies started taking proper liability for the actions of their LLMs.

I literally laughed out loud reading the headline. Good shit, hopefully the Find Out season will carry on at this kinda pace. Probably won't, but it'd be nice to see.