Google Fails To Overturn Worldwide Site-Blocking Order

[hihello]

Google has failed in its efforts to overturn a worldwide site-blocking order handed down by a Canadian court in 2014. The British Columbia Court of Appeal found that despite not being a party to the case, Google must block a range of websites from its worldwide search results due to its business presence in the country.

The prominence of Google in endless Internet-related matters often sees the company get tangled up in the disputes of others. A case from 2014 provides a particularly interesting example.

Equustek Solutions Inc. v. Jack saw two Canadian entities embroiled in legal action over stolen intellectual property used to manufacture competing products.

Google has no direct links to the case whatsoever, yet it became sucked in when Equustek Solutions claimed that Google’s search results were helping to send visitors to websites operated by the defendants (former Equustek employees) that were selling unlawful products.

Google previously removed links to the sites from its Google.ca results on a voluntary basis, but Equustek wanted a broader response. In a subsequent court ruling handed in British Columbia, Google was ordered to remove the infringing websites’ listings from its central database in the United States, meaning that the ruling had worldwide implications.

Google was given a little under two weeks to comply with the decision but quickly appealed in the hope of achieving a better outcome. Now, a year later, the British Columbia Court of Appeal has handed down its decision and it’s more bad news for Google.

According to an analysis by Canadian law professor Michael Geist, the decision addresses two key questions, both involving jurisdiction.

i) Whether the court has jurisdiction over Google

ii) Whether the injunction handed down in Canada has power outside its borders

On the first issue, Google argued that it does not operate servers in British Columbia, nor does it have any local offices. However, the Court decided that the company does carry out business in the region.

“Google does not have resident employees, business offices, or servers in the Province, but its activities in gathering data through web crawling software, in distributing targeted advertising to users in British Columbia, and in selling advertising to British Columbia businesses are sufficient to uphold the chambers judge’s finding that it does business in the Province,” the ruling (pdf) reads.

On the second issue – whether a court order handed down in British Columbia could have jurisdiction beyond its borders – the Court of Appeal again ruled against Google.

“British Columbia courts are called upon to adjudicate disputes involving foreign residents on a daily basis, and the fact that their decisions may affect the activities of those people outside the borders of British Columbia is not determinative of whether an order may be granted,” the ruling reads.

Noting Google’s concerns that it could potentially be “subjected to restrictive orders from courts in all parts of the world, each concerned with its own domestic law,” the court underlined the importance of exercising caution when handing down orders that have the potential to limit expression in another country. However, it found no problem with the ruling of the lower Court.

“In the case before us, there is no realistic assertion that the judge’s order will offend the sensibilities of any other nation. It has not been suggested that the order prohibiting the defendants from advertising wares that violate the intellectual property rights of the plaintiffs offends the core values of any nation,” the ruling reads.

However, should any nation have an issue with the decision, they are free to appeal, the ruling adds.

“In the unlikely event that any jurisdiction finds the order offensive to its core values, an application could be made to the court to modify the order so as to avoid the problem.”

Dismissing Google’s appeal, Justice Groberman signs off on the blocking injunction in Equustek Solutions’ favor.

“The plaintiffs have established, in my view, that an order limited to the
google.ca search site would not be effective. I am satisfied that there was a basis, here, for giving the injunction worldwide effect,” the Judge concludes.

Google is reportedly considering its options, with an escalation to the Supreme Court a potential (but as yet unconfirmed) outcome.

Source:TorrentFreak

[steven36]

if Google ever lets any country dictate what sites they can post worldwide will slowly be the death of Google.. So it's in Google's best interest to not do this . already i use there site less than ever and use others to find what i need because of all the takedowns. Also there is word of mouth and sites that just list sites nothing else. sounds like Canada is not going be happy tell they take the internet back to the 1990s .

Before Google, it was necessary to search all of the popular search engines to find relevant content for many searches; I remember being in college during this time, and going though Yahoo, Webcrawler, Alta Vista, Lycos, etc. just to find relevant pages.

[ugurano]

realy funny xD

[steven36]

More News on this : Canadian Court Affirms Global Takedown Order to Google

In a dangerous ruling yesterday, a Canadian appeals court upheld an order requiring Google to edit the Internet and effectively “disappear” websites selling a product that allegedly infringed trade secret rights. Google had challenged the order as an improper overreach: a Canadian court shouldn't be using its authority to make rules about what users in other countries can and cannot access. EFF filed a supporting brief, explaining that the order would have likely violated the U.S. Constitution—one of many reasons a foreign court shouldn’t presume to issue orders that will affect citizens far beyond its jurisdiction.

In the case, Equustek Solutions v. Morgan Jack, the plaintiff Equustek accused the defendant Morgan Jack of selling counterfeit routers. After getting an order requiring Morgan Jack to stop its activities, Equustek turned to Google, asking it to take down links to the websites. Google offered to remove particular pages that came up on searches on Google.ca, but Equustek wanted more. It wanted to have entire domains removed, and for Google to stop indexing or referencing the entirety of allegedly infringing websites on its search engines worldwide. The trial court ordered Google to do just that.

The appeals court’s decision to affirm that order sets a dangerous precedent. A Canadian court is free to issue orders controlling activity within its jurisdiction. But global orders requiring an intermediary to edit the Internet are something else entirely. Yesterday’s ruling, in a nutshell, lays the groundwork for nations with authoritarian restrictions on speech to also impose their own rules on the global Internet—even if those rules conflict with the laws of other nations. For example, as we explained in our brief, the trial court's injunction decision would likely not have survived in the U.S., where Google is based.

The case need not end here; Google can still appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. We hope it does so. No single country should have veto power over Internet speech.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/06/canadian-court-affirms-global-takedown-order-google

[digimon]

if Google ever lets any country dictate what sites they can post worldwide will slowly be the death of Google.. So it's in Google's best interest to not do this . already i use there site less than ever and use others to find what i need because of all the takedowns. Also there is word of mouth and sites that just list sites nothing else. sounds like Canada is not going be happy tell they take the internet back to the 1990s .

Before Google, it was necessary to search all of the popular search engines to find relevant content for many searches; I remember being in college during this time, and going though Yahoo, Webcrawler, Alta Vista, Lycos, etc. just to find relevant pages.

know any good non google serch engine "thats like google" that doesnt listin to takedown?

[steven36]

if Google ever lets any country dictate what sites they can post worldwide will slowly be the death of Google.. So it's in Google's best interest to not do this . already i use there site less than ever and use others to find what i need because of all the takedowns. Also there is word of mouth and sites that just list sites nothing else. sounds like Canada is not going be happy tell they take the internet back to the 1990s .

Before Google, it was necessary to search all of the popular search engines to find relevant content for many searches; I remember being in college during this time, and going though Yahoo, Webcrawler, Alta Vista, Lycos, etc. just to find relevant pages.

know any good non google serch engine "thats like google" that doesnt listin to takedown?

Here's a good list of search engines

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_search_engines

But there's so more out there not as poplar yet :)

[straycat19]

If I were google I would block access to all CA sites from outside of Canada and block all searches from Canada to CA sites only. We don't need Canada, they offer nothing except now the court system would be a good target for Anonymous.

[steven36]

If I were google I would block access to all CA sites from outside of Canada and block all searches from Canada to CA sites only. We don't need Canada, they offer nothing except now the court system would be a good target for Anonymous.

That's what China did to Google was block them . So Google should Canada lol. But Canada has a lot good things. There women are hot and there booze is good :P they export a lot different stuff . Just they should not impose there laws on the whole world . :rolleyes:

[dMog]

If I were google I would block access to all CA sites from outside of Canada and block all searches from Canada to CA sites only. We don't need Canada, they offer nothing except now the court system would be a good target for Anonymous.

we canucks are about the only friend you yanks got in the world...if we were to throw out friends to the wolves like you want to do for every stupid thing they ever did...well america would be standing alone for the past 250 years.... the judges get thing wrong quite often...just read your very own local AMERICAN news paper for proof of concept

[steven36]

we canucks are about the only friend you yanks got in the world..

This is not true only reason you thank that is because you are from Canada . they done all poll in 2013 on 10 Countries That Love (and Hate) United States of America the Most and Canada dont make the list even. ^_^

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/the-exchange/10-countries-love-hate-america-most-163930019.html

USA gets along with Canada now but were at War with British-Canadian forces in 1812 when the USA began expanding .

[dMog]

we canucks are about the only friend you yanks got in the world..

This is not true only reason you thank that is because you are from Canada . they done all poll in 2013 on 10 Countries That Love (and Hate) United States of America the Most and Canada dont make the list even. ^_^

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/the-exchange/10-countries-love-hate-america-most-163930019.html

USA gets along with Canada now but were at War with British-Canadian forces in 1812 when the USA began expanding .

yea we canadians burnt down the white house...you did not really begin to win that war until the british regular army took over the battle from our farmers and indians..then you kicked the Britt's butts because the French were pissed off at the Britts so the french financed and trained your army...anyway..that is the history as the rest of the world knows it... your american version is slightly different with the french playing very minor roll

EDIT: just some good nurtured ribbing among good neighbors...and friends this is way off topic so please don't respond to open a cam of worms

[steven36]

we canucks are about the only friend you yanks got in the world..

This is not true only reason you thank that is because you are from Canada . they done all poll in 2013 on 10 Countries That Love (and Hate) United States of America the Most and Canada dont make the list even. ^_^

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/the-exchange/10-countries-love-hate-america-most-163930019.html

USA gets along with Canada now but were at War with British-Canadian forces in 1812 when the USA began expanding .

yea we canadians burnt down the white house...you did not really begin to win that war until the british regular army took over the battle from our farmers and indians..then you kicked the Britt's butts because the French were pissed off at the Britts so the french financed and trained your army...anyway..that is the history as the rest of the world knows it... your american version is slightly different with the french playing very minor roll

EDIT: just some good nurtured ribbing among good neighbors...and friends this is way off topic so please don't respond to open a cam of worms

Actually I am part Cherokee and a lot Indians up there were US Indians that escaped from being killed by the US army .the US is only the land of the free as long as you follow there white mans law . But in Canada they stuck all my people on the res like they did in the states . So regardless the Indians would had to live by white mans laws if they dont want to be on a res. But us who do live by the laws of our country should not have follow laws of any other country . if Canada can tell Google what they can publish and what not, that means any country could be able to tell them what to when there based in the USA and its against the U.S. Constitution. Freedom of press and speech..

Edit:And it is on topic like it or not no company from the USA should take orders from another country that pay taxes to England . Because that's the whole reason my forefathers fought and died was for our freedom against there laws . If Canada dont care about freedom of press and speech . Google should block them too a nation wide level if they cant come to terms with them . ;)

Whats fair is fair when the UK complain about Google privacy policy . Google changed it for them at a nation wide level but the UK could not change it at a worldwide level . :)

[dMog]

we canucks are about the only friend you yanks got in the world..

This is not true only reason you thank that is because you are from Canada . they done all poll in 2013 on 10 Countries That Love (and Hate) United States of America the Most and Canada dont make the list even. ^_^

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/the-exchange/10-countries-love-hate-america-most-163930019.html

USA gets along with Canada now but were at War with British-Canadian forces in 1812 when the USA began expanding .

yea we canadians burnt down the white house...you did not really begin to win that war until the british regular army took over the battle from our farmers and indians..then you kicked the Britt's butts because the French were pissed off at the Britts so the french financed and trained your army...anyway..that is the history as the rest of the world knows it... your american version is slightly different with the french playing very minor roll

EDIT: just some good nurtured ribbing among good neighbors...and friends this is way off topic so please don't respond to open a cam of worms

Actually I am part Cherokee and a lot Indians up there were US Indians that escaped from being killed by the US army .the US is only the land of the free as long as you follow there white mans law . But in Canada they stuck all my people on the res like they did in the states . So regardless the Indians would had to live by white mans laws if they dont want to be on a res. But us who do live by the laws of our country should not have follow laws of any other country . if Canada can tell Google what they can publish and what not, that means any country could be able to tell them what to when there based in the USA and its against the U.S. Constitution. Freedom of press and speech..

Edit:And it is on topic like it or not no company from the USA should take orders from another country that pay taxes to England . Because that's the whole reason my forefathers fought and died was for our freedom against there laws . If Canada dont care about freedom of press and speech . Google should block them too a nation wide level if they cant come to terms with them . ;)

Whats fair is fair when the UK complain about Google privacy policy . Google changed it for them at a nation wide level but the UK could not change it at a worldwide level . :)

i had no idea i paid taxes to England.... and i also know the full extent of what was done all those years ago when our forefathers forced Indians onto reservations... and would not allow them out pretty much... several generations of a proud and vibrant people have had to pay that high price and there are still significant social and economic issues that today are still evident and will be so for a few more generations to come...time to also be looking at fixing this too...bottom line many times the people in power or people able to effect change have no real idea of the reality or consequences of their actions...or at worse... they fully know and either do not care or are intentionally doing morally wrong

[steven36]

we canucks are about the only friend you yanks got in the world..

This is not true only reason you thank that is because you are from Canada . they done all poll in 2013 on 10 Countries That Love (and Hate) United States of America the Most and Canada dont make the list even. ^_^

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/the-exchange/10-countries-love-hate-america-most-163930019.html

USA gets along with Canada now but were at War with British-Canadian forces in 1812 when the USA began expanding .

yea we canadians burnt down the white house...you did not really begin to win that war until the british regular army took over the battle from our farmers and indians..then you kicked the Britt's butts because the French were pissed off at the Britts so the french financed and trained your army...anyway..that is the history as the rest of the world knows it... your american version is slightly different with the french playing very minor roll

EDIT: just some good nurtured ribbing among good neighbors...and friends this is way off topic so please don't respond to open a cam of worms

Actually I am part Cherokee and a lot Indians up there were US Indians that escaped from being killed by the US army .the US is only the land of the free as long as you follow there white mans law . But in Canada they stuck all my people on the res like they did in the states . So regardless the Indians would had to live by white mans laws if they dont want to be on a res. But us who do live by the laws of our country should not have follow laws of any other country . if Canada can tell Google what they can publish and what not, that means any country could be able to tell them what to when there based in the USA and its against the U.S. Constitution. Freedom of press and speech..

Edit:And it is on topic like it or not no company from the USA should take orders from another country that pay taxes to England . Because that's the whole reason my forefathers fought and died was for our freedom against there laws . If Canada dont care about freedom of press and speech . Google should block them too a nation wide level if they cant come to terms with them . ;)

Whats fair is fair when the UK complain about Google privacy policy . Google changed it for them at a nation wide level but the UK could not change it at a worldwide level . :)

i had no idea i paid taxes to England.... and i also know the full extent of what was done all those years ago when our forefathers forced Indians onto reservations... and would not allow them out pretty much... several generations of a proud and vibrant people have had to pay that high price and there are still significant social and economic issues that today are still evident and will be so for a few more generations to come...time to also be looking at fixing this too...bottom line many times the people in power or people able to effect change have no real idea of the reality or consequences of their actions...or at worse... they fully know and either do not care or are intentionally doing morally wrong

Really the truth of the matter was the American Indians were at peace every since they walked across the continents before they broke apart tell the white man came . It really belongs too them . It was stolen.

Queen costs us more than the Brits pay

Over the past 10 years, the Canadian cost of supporting the monarchy has more than doubled

http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/queen-costs-us-more-than-the-brits-pay/

You guys pay more to the Queen than the people that live there does . :rolleyes:

[dMog]

wrong link

[dMog]

http://www.monarchist.ca/en/myths

[steven36]

http://www.monarchist.ca/en/myths

The link I post about how much money you guys pay to the Queen is posted by Canadians Not the USA . I dont support being ruled by no Queen and King and lucky for me I live somewhere I dont have too . I think the Monarchy should be ended While they seem peaceful now one day you may have another Mad King . You dont need 2 heads of state . Why post a link by the Monarchy wen they love to break it down to per capita and make it sound all nice and rosy? If I was making 50 million a year off somewhere id post anything make it seem great! :lol:

Tom Freda, national director of Citizens for a Canadian Republic, is not so sure. “Ah, the Monarchists. They love to break it down to per capita and make it sound all nice and rosy,” he says. “But $40 million or $50 million [a year] sure sounds like a lot to me.

The problem, Freda says, is that Canada effectively has two heads of state: the Queen and the Governor General, as well as a band of provincial reps. And that overlap creates “redundant and obsolete positions” that end up costing Canadian taxpayers big bucks. The Queen’s agents need to learn a lesson in frugality during these tough times, he argues, especially since most of the work done by the lieutenant-governors is already handled by deputy premiers and other officials. Freda says it is “exorbitant,” for example, that the Ontario lieutenant-governor employs nine staff members, and “shocking” that the B.C. office shells out piles of cash each year to run a 102-room official residence for its lieutenant-governor. As for the “highly irrelevant” Governor General? “The Governor General has literary awards and cuts ribbons and plants trees and travels to Nunavut and eats seal meat. But what else?”

Anyways what can Canada do to Google nothing but block them off from your country . That's what China done when they would not do what they wanted.

Seems that's Goggle may be up too not only to Canada but France as well if not were heading for a censored internet it a worldwide problem

.

Other Countries Wake Up

By and large, Google’s been successful with various demands over the years in pulling content out of country-specific versions — as it did with China — while keeping that content in Google.com, which anyone worldwide could access. But last year, twin cases started blowing apart the myth that Google was fulfilling its censorship obligations.

The first was in Canada. Last year, Google was ordered to remove content about a company in a trademark case worldwide, not just in Google Canada. Google appealed that case. This week, it lost that appeal. It’s unclear if Google will appeal again. It has at least one more attempt at doing so.

The Canadian action was overshadowed by the rise of the Right To Be Forgotten in the European Union. As Google implemented removal requests under this new right, it only did so within the country-specific versions of Google where the request initiated. Various privacy agencies in the EU realized this meant such content remained on Google.com, easily accessible to EU citizens who went there. They’ve pressured for broader censorship.

This week, the French privacy regulator demanded Google censor globally. Now, we’re waiting for Google’s response. Potentially, it could appeal and face fines while that process happens.

The New Era Of Google Censorship

The myth of censorship that Google had maintained is now busted. There’s no going back. Smart governments are going to understand that when Google censors only on country-specific versions, that’s not really censoring in the way they’ve demanded. So what happens next?

One holding action has been that Google has made it increasingly difficult to reach Google.com since fall of last year. Since I wrote about this in March, the situation has gotten even more difficult. On my trip to France earlier this week, there was no option to make Google.com my default choice. Google did seem to restore the Google.com link to always showing on the bottom of the Google France home page. However, using that option didn’t make it “stick” as a choice, as was the case for years.

Google could take further action. Anyone trying to reach Google.com in a country demanding total censorship, as with France, might get redirected back to Google France, at Google.fr. Technically, this isn’t difficult at all.

But would that be enough? What if the authorities in France remain upset that people outside France can see content they’ve ordered to be “forgotten.” That’s the tricky issue. Technically, Google could do this easily. It already does this for DMCA requests that happen in the US, imposing that censorship globally.

When One Country Censors For All

What the French authorities think might be great for privacy reasons could come back and haunt them politically. What if France or the EU disagrees with political censorship demands from a particular country aimed at Google? If Google has to pull content worldwide because of those demands, will they be happy that another country has imposed censorship on EU citizens?

I think not. A compromise might be that Google institutes IP-based censorship. This is where Google would look at someone’s IP address — it’s like their internet telephone number — and determine if they were within a particular country. If you’re actually within France, then you get French censorship. If you’re not, you don’t.

Google could implement this. The question is whether that would be enough for the cases in front of it now as well as more to come. If not, we’re heading into a world where the censorship demands of one country could be imposed upon the citizens of another.

http://marketingland.com/google-censorship-mythbusted-132106

[dMog]

once again you have no idea what canadian politics is ... not going to argue with you but it has been about 200 years in Canada since a king or a queen had to give permission for any thing that happened in our Canadian parliament..if you want to argue that fact ...talk to yourself and take both sides of the argument...that way you may actually win...but back to the original post...i think we are both on the same page there

[steven36]

once again you have no idea what canadian politics is ... not going to argue with you but it has been about 200 years in Canada since a king or a queen had to give permission for any thing that happened in our Canadian parliament..if you want to argue that fact ...talk to yourself and take both sides of the argument...that way you may actually win...but back to the original post...i think we are both on the same page there

I like Canadians because I have many friends from there I'm not trying to win . I read what you're article says it says the reason they pay all this money to the Queen is for bullrings and stuff . For that much money a year I could build you anything you wanted you're government needs to wake up . The US military calls the British the borrowers.

49% of Canadian youth against monarchy so its not just the US that dont want them

The Forum Research poll tells a slightly different story.

Forty-nine per cent of young people in the poll were in favour of abolishing the monarchy in Canada.

"How you ask the question changes everything," said J.J. McCullough, a political commentator and the B.C. spokesman for Citizens for a Canadian Republic.

J.J. McCullough said it's "preposterous" that Canada has a foreign monarch as head of state. (Courtesy of J.J. McCullough)

"Should Canada abolish the monarchy? Should Canada cut ties to the British Royal Family? That gets a very different response from: Should Canada have a Canadian citizen living in Canada as head of state of Canada?"

A whopping 73 per cent of Forum Research poll voters think Canada's head of state should be Canadian born and reside in Canada.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/royal-family-support-by-canadians-waning-poll-indicates-1.3072469

[dMog]

about the only thing i can say is that i agree with you about the head of state... and also... that you seem to misconstrue either accidentally or on purpose the difference between a symbolic head of state and a head of state that is not symbolic... either that or you just like to argue... but really from your posts it seems you are guilty on both counts