A Berlin court has determined that Google's AI-generated search responses are merely a new format for summarizing third-party content, not original work. The ruling, which came in early June, concluded that users can easily recognize the search engine is aggregating information from other sources, and Google has no 'decisive influence' over the content. The court emphasized that the AI responses are not presented as independent statements, and the average user would understand they are simply compiling information from various websites.
The case originated from a lawsuit filed by a perfume company, which claimed that Google's AI Overviews mentioned its protected brand names alongside cheaper knockoffs and linked to their websites. The court did not find this to be trademark infringement, stating that the search engine was merely surfacing information already available on other sites. This contrasts with a previous ruling from a Munich court, which held Google directly liable for false AI-generated claims, treating the summaries as independent content.
The legal distinction between the two rulings highlights the ongoing debate over liability in generative search. The Munich court had ruled that AI summaries count as independent content, making Google responsible for false statements. In contrast, the Berlin court argued that the search engine does not present AI-generated text as its own statements and has no control over the content. This divergence underscores the ambiguity in defining the legal responsibilities of AI search providers.
Source: thedecoder
