> Google has argued that defamation threats can be used to suppress information that might help customers steer clear of bad businesses, and that it should only remove reviews with a court order.
> It followed a judgment in the South Australian supreme court last week awarding $750,000 in damages to Adelaide barrister Gordon Cheng for an October 2018 review left in English and Chinese on Google, claiming Cheng gave “false and misleading advices”.
> Cheng told the court he had lost around 80% of his business, and was subsequently diagnosed with depression. Google took down the review around two months after Cheng was first alerted to it, and six months after it was posted.
> Google has argued that defamation threats can be used to suppress information that might help customers steer clear of bad businesses, and that it should only remove reviews with a court order.
> It followed a judgment in the South Australian supreme court last week awarding $750,000 in damages to Adelaide barrister Gordon Cheng for an October 2018 review left in English and Chinese on Google, claiming Cheng gave “false and misleading advices”.
> Cheng told the court he had lost around 80% of his business, and was subsequently diagnosed with depression. Google took down the review around two months after Cheng was first alerted to it, and six months after it was posted.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/feb/14/court-say...