As a child, I would look up any of my parents’ names on the internet.
What was that about?
What did they look like?
Did they have a big red hat on?
I knew the answers, of course.
I had read about it.
So when Google began to index Google search results in the UK, I was shocked.
It wasn’t an unfamiliar problem, but a serious one.
In 2010, Google was sued by a group of internet users in the US who claimed they had been ripped off by Google when they searched for information about the World Trade Centre.
The lawsuit alleged that the search giant had paid a $1m ransom to obtain the identities of hundreds of millions of internet addresses.
Google eventually paid the plaintiffs, and the terms of the settlement were that it would not search the internet to find information about them, and would only index Google results for information relevant to the case.
As part of the terms, Google also agreed to cease searching for information on the World War II bombing of Pearl Harbour in the United States.
In other words, the company would not index information about people who had not been charged with a crime.
Google was forced to agree to pay $400m to settle the case, but the company did not.
In 2015, the same plaintiffs sued Google for the same reason, claiming they had to pay a $7m fine for the data they had used.
Google admitted in court documents that it had been wrong to pay out that sum.
A year after the settlement, the UK’s highest court ruled that it should be required to do so.
The case brought the internet giants into the spotlight again when a similar lawsuit was filed in the European Union.
In that case, the European Commission accused Google of violating the European Charter of Fundamental Rights and the Digital Single Market by offering services to customers outside of the EU.
Google agreed to pay the EU the money it had originally paid, and it agreed to keep offering its search services to EU customers.
But Google did not stop offering those services to US users.
Google continued to offer the same services to other countries.
The European Commission found that the company had engaged in an unlawful conduct by offering search services outside the EU to EU citizens without permission from EU citizens.
Google’s failure to comply with the law was found to be unlawful and the EU’s ruling was upheld.
In 2016, a UK court upheld a European Court of Justice ruling that forced Google to block searches for the name of a child who had been raped in 2014.
The British judge found that Google’s refusal to block the search of a name for a child raped in a hotel room that was not their own did not violate European law.
Google said that the name was a “potential public figure”, and therefore could be blocked by its search engine.
Google told the court that it complied with the European Court’s ruling, but did not provide any further details about why it had not complied with that ruling.
In 2018, the US Department of Justice filed an amicus curiae brief arguing that the EU had no authority to enforce its own search policy because it did not have the power to compel Google to act.
The US government argued that the UK was legally obligated to pay Google a $6.4m fine to settle its case, which is now set to be paid by Google.
Google declined to comment on the amicus brief.
In 2019, the EU sued Google, alleging that it infringed on a copyright by advertising in Google’s search results.
The EU claimed that the same Google service was being used to advertise other Google products.
In a statement, Google denied the allegations, saying it complied fully with European search policies.
The UK’s Supreme Court agreed with the EU and decided that Google should pay the fine it had already paid.
In the UK case, a separate legal dispute involving Google’s Google Search Ads service was filed by the US-based Internet Association, a trade group representing the internet companies.
Google argued that it could not use the US government’s “injunctive powers” to force the company to block ads from the association.
In an order, the Supreme Court rejected that argument, saying that the US has the right to force companies to comply.
But the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit also rejected that position.
In May 2018, Google agreed with Google to settle a case in the Northern District of California, where it had sued a former Google employee.
The two companies had agreed that the former employee could use the services of Google Search to advertise on the Google homepage, and that the Google search service could not be used to provide search results to Google’s competitors.
The court ruled in favour of Google.
The former employee sued Google in California on behalf of all current and former Google employees who worked at Google in the 1990s.
He said the search engine had made a mistake by making its search results less relevant to its business, and by failing to take action against its competitors. In