0
39

[–] DeliciousGuave 0 points 39 points (+39|-0) ago 

Surprisingly sensible verdict. I am impressed and pleasantly surprised.

0
7

[–] topaz_fist 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

Canada nailing it all over the place first they back out of tpp then they do this way to go canada. can you knock some sense into the us for me please.

0
18

[–] bleatingnonsense 0 points 18 points (+18|-0) ago 

As a Canadian, please dont. Really. We are as full of shit as anyone else. That verdict is pure common sense, it would have been the same anywhere else that isnt North Korea. Wait a few months before saying Canada wont sign into the TPP. Our mining companies wreck havoc world-wide. We have a Canadian Patriot Act. We dont give a shit about environment. Our reputation of being a peaceful country is no longer deserved, we have adopted an aggressive and antagonist approach to international politics. We censor our scientists and have destroyed decades worth of scientific data. We walk hand in hand with the NSA on civilian data collection. We have less massive demonstrations, but have been called out by the UN on those we've had because of the way police handled protesters. Now is really not the time to pat ourselves on the back.

0
2

[–] aggressivesalad 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Many people who usually made these laws and decisions don't understand the internet. I am glad that more people in the political and legal world are becoming more educated about something that is so vital in our lives.

0
0

[–] Crosten ago 

The SCoC has a history of this. Don't always agree with them but on the whole I am very grateful that they stick to sensible ethics and often do a great job.

0
8

[–] darcalus 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

a google search isn't any more defamatory than a library card catalog.

google is just showing you what's out there.

0
0

[–] Balrogic ago  (edited ago)

So long as they're merely showing you what's out there, sure. If they're actively trying to censor some things associated with liabilities that ought not apply to someone merely showing what's out there then they're taking responsibility for the content they publish.

Since Google does censor and fudge search results, they've accepted responsibility for the content they publish. The ruling got it wrong.

0
0

[–] Krutonium ago 

I would argue that it shouldn't apply, since if google could afford to and could ignore the US Gov, they wouldn't censor.

0
8

[–] Shakyamuni 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

Duh.

0
6

[–] coldacid 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

Holy fuck, a sensible Canadian court decision regarding Google. I should buy a lottery ticket.

0
4

[–] MetalPirate 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Good, that's how it should be. You can't expect a search engine to censor the internet.

0
4

[–] feanturi 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

I read recently that Google decided to replace search results for Kickass torrents with a site loaded with malware. While legit arguments can be made against torrent sites, what's the next target they'll just decide "doesn't belong"?

0
2

[–] 42elite 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago  (edited ago)

us Canadians always being sensible when the rest of the world is fucking around

0
0

[–] isitfridayyet ago 

I gave you an up-voat, but let's not get carried away. Generally Canadian courts do ultimately make sensible judgments (sometimes upon appeal), but I definitely wouldn't say always.

0
0

[–] AtheistComic ago  (edited ago)

Ergo, neither is The Pirate Bay if they only publish swarm locations.

0
1

[–] Br0k3nsn0fl6k32 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Much better decision in my opinion here. Can you imagine if Dewey was suddenly liable for all those archived publications?

load more comments ▼ (4 remaining)