Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

I feel like they will get sued for that extremely quickly, considering their dominating position (Chrome) and being in the ad-serving business at the same time.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5a/Br...



sort by: page size:

Why doesn't Wikipedia sue this company and their clients?

They may not have actually sued, just threatened Microsoft with an audit.[1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spyglass,_Inc.#Browser_wars


I am just waiting for a lawyer for someone with Internet Addiction (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3480687/) to sue this company over one of their supported apps.

This is the kind of thing that I fear will prompt a backlash from the people and government and destroy the entire online ads regime that underpins the current Internet.


They did it against Google, Facebook, and Youtube as well.

Well, it was seven years ago they filed the suit. But yeah, they sure are sticking to it.

> It is like website owners suing Google for crawling, indexing and increasing visibility of their website.

Yeah, that happened. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_10,_Inc._v._Google_Inc..


Haha, imagine a company suing another for the way people use their platform, as if it’s their responsibility to police the people using it for harmful purposes! Ridiculous!

At this point they're both fighting a much bigger battle than themselves. Also, it is the website company who is bringing suit.

In the same vein as Adobe sues me for photoshopping a picture or Alphabet sues me for googling my exgirlfriends' names?


I don't see how they could be sued, even over such a comment, since I'm sure they don't make any guarantees regarding the availability of the market, much less for the ranking/search functionality. You would have to prove malice or gross negligence but I think for the latter you would need good lawyers to have a chance.

Have they ever been sued for this? I'm curious if their user agreements protect them from it at all, but when these platforms destroy people's businesses it seems like the exact reason lawsuits exist.


I'm not American, nor a lawyer, but I have read that as they offered no disclaimers of ownership of the website they were promoting, that it might be possible to challenge them.

Related, an advertising company who was accused of tracking history: http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/node/6695

It's a hard place. If they sue, they will be blamed as hardcore radicals. Remember most of the tech journalists depend on advertising.

Only now, after selling out their users and lying about it, only after seeing they can't manipulate the public with distractions, now they sue.

Let me get this straight - they paid a company to scrape data for them, and then sued them for scraping their own data as well?

I doubt there'll be a lawsuit - more of an SEO battle... which doesn't look particularly good for HK the First.

They'll start serving ads and sharing personal data of all of the people they sue?
next

Legal | privacy