Philosopher - 2:15 pm on Sep 30, 2010 (gmt 0)
I think what most people are forgetting here is that France has a very different legal system than many of us are accustomed to.
Within the framework of France's legal system, the verdict was pretty much what you would expect.
Regardless how you look at them, the Search Suggestions are a form of a statement. They can easily influence the thoughts and beliefs of the person being presented with the suggestion.
In this case, the suggestion was a negative one about the individual. 100% true or not, it was negative.
The issue here is that, in France, from what I have read, the person/entity making the defamatory statements has the burden of proof on THEM to PROVE the statements being made are 100% true, or if the matter is of public importance that they conducted serious investigation before making the statement.
That's the issue, since this was an auto-generated statement, Google could not have done any serious investigation and Google could not prove 100% that the statements they were making about the gentleman were true especially seeing how, according to the referenced article, the sentence for corruption of a minor was not yet definite.