&gt; at least in this case the Doctor was in communication with Google and she gave Google multiple opportunities to stop publishing&#x2F;promoting the false content.<p>And I&#x27;m sure some people regularly contact Google asking for removal of &quot;false&quot; information about dinosaur fossils and the earth being more than a few thousand years old.  Acting on any such request would be making a decision on the veracity of that information.<p>The courts <i>should</i> have told the plaintiff to sue the site publishing the information instead, not a search engine linking to that information.  But, of course, Google is a bigger target, and makes for an easier emotional argument about &quot;those foreign corporations&quot;, and foreign courts seem all too happy to entertain such arguments.<p>I don&#x27;t care whether the original site&#x27;s posting is true or false; I hope Google wins this on appeal either way.  (By contrast, I&#x27;d have absolutely no problem with a defamation judgment against the actual site hosting the information, and if that site removes it, so will Google.)