Google Failed to Overturn Blocking Order in CanadaAdded: Monday, June 15th, 2015
Category: Recent Headlines Involving File Sharing > Ridiculous Criminal Trials
Tags:ET, p2p, Torrent, Piracy, Peer To Peer, Network, Hackers, Internet, BitTorrent, Google, utorrent, bitcomet, extratorrent, www.extratorrent.cc, 2015
The tech giant has failed to overturn a last-year worldwide blocking order issued by a Canadian court. The appeal court decided that despite not being a party to the case, the search engine must block websites from its worldwide search results because of its business presence in the country.
The case known as Equustek Solutions Inc. v. Jack was launched back in 2014, when 2 Canadian entities were fighting in court over stolen intellectual property used to produce competing products. Eventually, Equustek Solutions claimed that Google’s search results helped send visitors to the sites operated by the company selling illegal products.
Despite the fact that Google removed links to the controversial websites from its Canadian version of the search engine, the plaintiffs wanted a broader response, and the court sided with the plaintiffs. Google was ordered to remove the sites’ listings from its worldwide searches. In response, Google appealed in the hope of achieving a better outcome, but failed. The matter is that the court decided that Google carries out business in the region and is therefore involved in the legal battle. In addition, the court decided that was no realistic assertion that the original order will offend the sensibilities of any other nation. And should any nation have an issue with the decision, they are free to appeal.
As a result, Google’s appeal was dismissed, and the judge signed off on the blocking injunction in Equustek Solutions’ favor, saying that an order limited to the Canadian-only version of Google would not be effective. According to reports, Google is considering the idea to escalate the issue to the Supreme Court.
Thanks to TorrentFreak for providing the source of the article.
Monday, June 15th, 2015
|Maybe they should have left it be.|
|"...the court decided that was no realistic assertion that the original order will offend the sensibilities of any other nation..." Well that's a new one.. It won't piss anyone else off so we order it Bah Humbug.|
|Despite being a consumer of Google services and like many of them. I enjoy large companies losing court cases. It gives hope that in some places tese billion dollar companies can't get away with always getting things their way,\. Except in most cases in the US. Where they are people.|
As for being a new thing. I haven't done any research, but I do that companies bring cases against a countries laws in other countries.
And in this case, countres who have concerns may raise them. That kind of ruling may be similar to other countries rulings in a world that is so interconnected. Don't know but makes sense. But could be wrong.
Our Supreme court would uphold the ruling. They don't always, but it is not like the US where judges often don't look a the law but vote according to their opinion and political bent.
Most Popular Stories