Google has a problem in Europe. The court issued a landmark ruling regarding AI

The German regional court in Munich issued an important ruling regarding the AI ​​Overview function, i.e. summaries generated by artificial intelligence appearing in Google search results. According to the court, this service cannot benefit from legal protection provided for traditional internet search engines because the content it creates is autonomous.

The case began with a complaint from two publishers from Munich. The answers generated by AI Overview allegedly linked their activities to fraud, unfair business practices and the so-called subscription traps. The problem was that this information did not apply to the specified publishers. The artificial intelligence system combined data from different sources and different companies, creating false connections.

Google’s AI Overview under the court’s microscope

According to the information presented, the algorithm was even supposed to formulate statements that could not be found in the materials indicated by Google as sources. The result was content that attributed actions to publishers that they had nothing to do with.

The court in Munich issued a temporary injunction prohibiting further dissemination of false information about the injured entities. At the same time, it held that Google, as the creator and operator of the system generating such summaries, is responsible for errors.

AI Overview Google is more than just a search engine

The justification emphasized that AI Overview is not a classic internet search engine. While traditional search engines direct users to specific websites, an artificial intelligence-based system creates its own message, which Internet users perceive as new content.

According to the court, the algorithms independently select, analyze and weigh information obtained from the Internet, and then formulate their own opinions. Because these mechanisms remain under Google’s full control, the company cannot benefit from the privileges provided to entities that only host content or refer to other sites.

The court rejected Google’s arguments

Google argued that users have the opportunity to check the correctness of the answers themselves by going to the indicated sources. The company also argued that audiences should not uncritically trust AI-generated content.

However, the court drew attention to analyzes indicating that a significant part of the answers generated by AI Overview cannot be fully verified using the linked sources. This means that users are often unable to determine how the artificial intelligence reached the presented conclusions.

In the court’s opinion, the classic search engine plays an important role in organizing Internet resources. AI Overview, on the other hand, is an additional service that creates new content. For this reason, there are no grounds to provide it with such broad legal protection as traditional Internet search engines. The ruling may be important for further assessment of technology companies’ liability for content generated by artificial intelligence.