Wave

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.

For all the reasons above AND ALSO because this particular lawsuit is a defamation case

Privacy lawsuits are hard because most privacy laws are super super weak, and there's very rarely a lot of money or enforcement backing privacy laws for...twenty million reasons, really...

But defamation suits? Those have teeth.

(In large part because, at least in some countries and including in the US, defamation laws protect public figures the least - and "public figures" legally includes most if not all politicians, and a hell of a lot of other rich ppl too)

A German court has ruled that Google can be held directly liable for false claims made by its AI Overviews, a decision that could put a serious legal dent in the whole “the AI made me do it” defense. According to The Next Web, the Regional Court of Munich issued a temporary injunction after Google’s AI Overviews wrongly tied two Munich publishers to scams, subscription traps, and dubious business practices. The court treated those AI-generated summaries as Google’s own statements, not just ordinary search results pointing to third-party pages. That distinction matters. Search engines have traditionally had more protection because they index and link to other people’s content. AI Overviews changes the machinery. Google is not just showing the web anymore. It is summarizing it, rewriting it, and sometimes apparently hallucinating a tiny legal grenade into the results page... This is still a preliminary injunction, not a final ruling, and Google can appeal. But for publishers, brands, SEOs, and anyone watching AI search swallow the results page, the message is clear: if Google wants to be the answer engine, courts may start treating it like the publisher of those answers.

Above: Amerila astreus with two large globs of defensive froth

Moths of the genus Amerila are often described as frother moths, because they're able to secrete a frothy, foul-tasting substance that helps to deter predators. The fluid is produced by the prothoracic glands, which are located near the base of each wing (just behind the moth's head) and a distinctive "sizzling" or "hissing" sound is emitted as the frothy substance bubbles out.

Above: Amerila astreus

As this article explains:

If molested, resting adults produce quantities of a frothy, orange fluid from their prothoracic glands, accompanied by a sizzling sound. The froth not only has an aversive odor to humans but also contains PAs (pyrrolizidine alkaloids) which are taste-repelling.

Above: a frother moth producing its defensive secretion

The adult moths of this genus are pharmacophagous, which means that they acquire the chemicals that are used to create their defensive froth by ingesting plants that contain toxic or noxious compounds; those chemicals are then sequestered within the moth's own body, where they are repurposed and transformed into a frothy secretion.

Above: genus Amerila

Frother moths also use aposematic markings to signal their toxicity and/or unpalatability. Their legs, thorax, and abdomen are all decorated with reddish-pink markings, and they have large black spots that stand out against their mostly-white bodies.

Above: Amerila crokeri and Amerila rubripes

The genus Amerila contains dozens of species, and they are all known to have this defense mechanism. They are widely distributed throughout many different parts of the world; depending on the species, they may be found in the Himalayas, Indochina, Southeast Asia, Melanesia, Australia, or Africa.

Above: Amerila crokeri

Several other moths from the subfamily Arctiinae can produce a similar defensive secretion when threatened, but the color, consistency, and composition of the substance differs greatly from one species to the next.

Sources & More Info:

iNaturalist: Genus Amerila

Metamorphosis Australia: Australian Arctiid Moths

Australian Lepidoptera: Amerila crokeri

Metamorphosis Australia: Weird and Wonderful Moths

Entomo Brasilis: Defensive Froth in Arctiidae Species in the Rio Grande do Sul State, Brazil (PDF)

Moths of Australia: Adult Adaptations for Survival