Untitled

children are not your property that you can do whatever you like with.

giving birth or impregnating someone or adopting doesn't give you some inherent wisdom that means you can never fuck up.

and you shouldn't have the right to abuse or neglect or misinform a child just because you have legal guardianship of them.

a staggering amount of parents view their children as their property and see advice as someone trying to take away their "deserved" control.

parents are allowed to have legal and social domain over their children,

parents are seen as suddenly being imbued with innate childrearing knowledge just by virtue of having a child, and

it's socially stigmatized to voice concern over a child that isn't "yours."

So

1. The court holds Google responsible for statements made by its AI, considering them Google's statements (search engines have limited liability for results in their engine as they're the words of other sites/companies/people), meaning when their AI lies/hallucinates they're liable for the defamation/harm resulting from those statements.

2. Google's defense that customers are generally aware of the lack of reliability and are responsible for fact checking was dismissed. As the court pointed out, that would "significantly diminish" AI Search's stated purpose and it can't be distinguished from Google's business practices/statements as a search tool.

3. Studies have found about 91% of Google's everyday AI responses are accurate, leaving millions of searches per HOUR with potential liability for falsehoods. 56% of correct responses weren't supported by the sources the AI listed. Both of which mean Google is now liable for a LOT more AI "errors."

4. Google was held liable for 80% of court costs in this case and this precedent is expected to reverberate around the world. This is a massive shift from the 3rd-party search provider role Google has previously played and it comes right as they've tied ALL searches to their AI search.