DISQUS

jehan · 1 year ago

That's exactly what Google should respond with. There are several benefits to "wiki" style content, where users can make contributions, but there is also the possibility of misinformation, or poorly cited information. If this is the first case, the the information should be removed by other users. However, if it is the latter, then the information should be properly cited.
Either way, it is up to the community to perpetually improve on wiki content such as this.

Avi · 1 year ago

Jehan, i agree with you. but you know, people can't write lies...the guy has wrote something that wasn't exist, and everybody knows that...google should remove it. otherwise...imagine people will spam google search, and google will say "we don't care". who will use google after that?

Jason · 1 year ago

Avi,

In the United States, there is a "Safe Harbor" clause where service providers are not held responsible for the actions of their users, given that the provider doesn't moderate/filter any content. Google should not be held legally liable since they did not post/moderate/filter the statement about the town. Now, should the person who posted the information be held liable? If the information is in fact incorrect (I don't know enough about the area to say one way or the other), then yes, the person who posted should be held liable. However, you can't blame Google for one of its users, and it does not attempt to monitor content, which is covered (at least in the US) by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) Safe Harbor Clause

Jason · 1 year ago

Also forgot to mention, if this is a lie, Google Earth gives you the power to modify the post about the town. It's called user regulated content. Given enough time, no false statements will be left. For example of this, see the big Wikipedia "controversy" about the CIA, FBI, Microsoft, etc changing Wikipedia entries, people spotting the changes and restoring the truth. If you don't want lies to be on something like Google Earth/Wikipedia, they give you the power to correct it. So, instead of complaining of Google allowing lies, go and fix them, and make sure when you do, you back it up with hard proof.

Avi · 1 year ago

Hi Jason,
i didn't blame google. it's written in the post that google can't control everything. but when u informing them about a lie, you expect they will act, and not gonna answer like "it's not my business".

about modify, i agree with u. but what can u do when terrorist using this free media for lies? u can't run after every article, tag or god knows wha, day by day, hour by hour.
i think the free internet and democratic world should find a way to fight with it, and i don't know how. i'm not working in google, Wikipedia, ask, yahoo, microsoft and etc.

Jason · 1 year ago

Avi,

Apparently you didn't understand my point about the DMCA. Under it, Google is provided a Safe Harbor and is not responsible for people using their service as well as they are within the terms of use, which this seemed to be. They have no legal obligation, and having to chase every claim of false information would be costly and could be used to "spam google" as you have used as an argument.

Also, who said anything about terrorists? If something that is written on a user generated site like Wikipedia is factually incorrect, you have the power to fix it. The point of these sites is to harness the power of the whole to provide information, which allows the topics to change accordingly with real world events.

Also, the "democratic world" should stay out of the internet. It was them staying out in the first place that makes the internet free (see China as a censor), and purely democratic. Until you show me a valid reason for Google to start censoring user generated content, I'll stick with the DMCA safe harbor that was put in place for a reason.

Craig · 1 year ago

You think it's a lie? Prove it. I suspect just like most things in that area of the world there are 2 versions of the story.

Erin · 1 year ago

doesn't surprise me. it's really not their fight.

Avi · 1 year ago

Erin and J-O, just imagine, we can all put lies...what will happen?
will u allow it to happen on Wikipedia too?
nope, your not gonna use Wikipedia if you will know it's full on lies, right?

Jason · 1 year ago

Avi,

Go take a look at Wikipedia, the users make sure that all information (or at least as much as possible) has a cited source so that it can be verified. If you're really worry about it being false information, then what about published encyclopedias? The process being building an encyclopedia is not transparent, so how can we verify the quality of them? No matter what you are looking at, there is always the possibility of false information. it's the nature of information. You need to take everything with a grain of salt and check the purposed facts. If you believe something without checking, then you only have yourself to blame for being led down the wrong path since you did not doubt the information.

J · 1 year ago

Im sorry this isnt googles fight, the city can edit and leave comments just like other users.

Avi · 1 year ago

j-o and jehan:
So I should be able to go and fill out info on google earth about google's main offices, saying its a breeding ground for transvestite prostitution, and since its user generated, google wouldn't feel right removing it even though its inaccurate ? Right.

SlipstreamBRO · 1 year ago

The reply from Google is incredibly surprising. Makes me want to cancel my GMail account. Ask Jeeves might be getting more of my business as well.

Avi · 1 year ago

well, you should see the comments on digg...no words...just read what people saying...

Johann · 1 year ago

It's not Google's job to verify all the info people post - if they're going to waste time/money doing that, they might as well just author the posts themselves, from scratch!
They're providing a service, and if you don't like it, you don't have to use it - but face it, every user-edited service (including wikipedia) has lies/misinformation that slipped under the radar.

Avi · 1 year ago

Mmmmm strange...so what u mean to say it's something like: "Let's spam google search too!"?

Johann · 1 year ago

I never said nor implied anything along those lines, nor did I condone or condemn the existence of false information on user-edited sites.

If you honestly believe all the information on these free, user-edited sites is legitimate and that "wow, this is the first time someone's ever posted false information on the internet!", then you are sorely mistaken.

But good job on putting words into my mouth with that whole "spam" nonsense. I enjoyed reading that.

ed · 1 year ago

go ahead and try. Google search is not based on opinion, it is based on actual content with no human judgement applied.

Wiki's and google earth descriptions are based solely on human opinion. With no facts verified by by official sources.

Spaztick · 1 year ago

I actually find the irony of the title of this article. You said the city sued Google, when in fact all they have done is file a complaint. Furthermore it's not the entire city that's concerned about this, just city officials; I don't think much of the town would even be aware of this.

Blake · 1 year ago

Land that "hadn't been settled in the past?" Give me a break! This is the middle east, not some new undiscovered continent. I don't know about who they kicked off, but I seriously doubt that a bunch of holocaust survivors showed up in Israel in the '40s or '50s and found a great place for a city that happened to have "never been inhabited."

Marcus · 1 year ago

@Burn dem and Rex:

Anti-semitic comments only bring us off-topic. Try to keep your comments within the bounds of human civility and good taste, OK?

angryrat · 1 year ago

So, was it built on Arab settlements?
(Because only the two sides' views are detailed.)