Przyklad 1
__________
[Przeklad fragmentow:]
Google, najpopularniejsza maszyna-wyszukiwarka, po cichu i potajemnie
wymazała ponad 100 adresów “kontrowersyjnych” witryn z niektórych wyników
wyszukiwania.
Na listach niemieckich i francuskich brakują witryny internetowe (web sites),
które są “antysemickie”, “neonazistowskie”, albo dotyczą “białej
supremacji “ – według nowego sprawozdania z Berkman Center Uniwersytetu
Harvardskiego (Harvard University). Również usunięty jest Jesus-is-
lord.com, “fundamentalistyczna” chrześcijańska witryna, która jest
zdecydowanie przeciwna spędzaniu płodów.
Google potwierdziło we wtorek, że te witryny zostały usunięte z rejestrów
dostępnych przez Google.fr i Google.de. Usunięte witryny wykazuje się na
listach głównego Google.com.
Raport Uniwersytetu Harvardzkiego, przygotowany przez studenta Bena Edelmana
i asystenta profesora Jonathana Zittraina i mającego być opublikowanym w
czwartek, jest rezultatem automatycznego testowania ogromnego, liczącego 2 i
pół miliardow stron indeksu i porównanie rezultatów zwróconych przez
różnojęzyczne wersje. Duet znalazł 113 eksluzynych witryn, najczęściej o
rasowym podłożu.
“Aby uniknąć odpowiedzialności prawnej usunęliśmy z wyszukiwarki witryn
Google.de adresy witryn i stron, które mogą być sprzeczne z prawem
niemieckim” – powiedział rzecznik prasowy Google Nate Tyler. Wskazał on, że
każda witryna zdjęta z listy została usunięta na specjalną skargę
zagranicznego rządu.
_______
Zrodla:
/Pelny tekst angielski
The Federal Observer – the Voice of Truth for America
October 29, 2002, Vol. 02, No. 301
McCullagh: Christian Site Makes Google's Hit List
GOOGLE DELETES MORE THAN 100 SITES FROM ENGINE
By Declan McCullagh - CNET News
Google, the world's most popular search engine, has quietly deleted more than
100 controversial sites from some search result listings.
Absent from Google's French and German listings are Web sites that are anti-
Semitic, pro-Nazi, or related to white supremacy, according to a new report
from Harvard University's Berkman Center. Also banned is Jesus-is-lord.com, a
fundamentalist Christian site that is adamantly opposed to abortion.
Google confirmed on Wednesday that the sites had been removed from listings
available at Google.fr and Google.de. The removed sites continue to appear in
listings on the main Google.com site.
The Harvard report, prepared by law student Ben Edelman and assistant
professor Jonathan Zittrain, and scheduled to be released Thursday, is the
result of automated testing of Google's massive 2.5 billion-page index and a
comparison of the results returned by different foreign-language versions.
The duo found 113 excluded sites, most with racial overtones.
"To avoid legal liability, we remove sites from Google.de search results
pages that may conflict with German law," said Google spokesman Nate Tyler.
He indicated that each site that was delisted came after a specific complaint
from a foreign government.
German law considers the publication of Holocaust denials and similar
material as an incitement of racial and ethnic hatred, and therefore illegal.
In the past, Germany has ordered Internet providers to block access to U.S.
Web sites that post revisionist literature.
France has similar laws that allowed a students' antiracism group to
successfully sue Yahoo in a Paris court for allowing Third Reich memorabilia
and Adolf Hitler's "Mein Kampf" to be sold on the company's auction sites. In
November 2001, a U.S. judge ruled that the First Amendment's guarantee of
free speech protects Yahoo from liability.
Google's battles
The Harvard report comes as Google is becoming increasingly embroiled in
international political disputes over copyright and censorship. China blocked
access to Google last month.
Google was criticized in March for bowing to a demand from the Church of
Scientology to delete critical sites from its index. In a response that won
praise, Google replied by pledging to report future legal threats to the
ChillingEffects.org site run by law school clinics.
As Google has become the way more and more people find information on the
Internet, it has also become an increasingly visible target for copyright
complaints about cached information and allegedly infringing links.
ChillingEffect.org's Google section lists 16 requests or legal threats the
company has received in the past three months. One Google competitor and
critic even suggested that the wildly popular search engine be transformed
into a government controlled "public utility."
Edelman, who created the program that tested URLs against Google's index,
said he was investigating a tip about Google's German-language version.
"One concern that I've had for some time vis-à-vis filtering is that
filtering is almost always secretive," Edelman said. "In the (library
filtering) case, that meant you couldn't look at the list of blocked sites.
In the Chinese government case, you can't see what sites are being blocked."
Edelman, who is a first-year law student, testified as an expert witness for
the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in a court challenge to a law
requiring libraries to install filtering software if they accept federal
funds. He is also a plaintiff in a second lawsuit filed in June to eviscerate
key portions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
Google's response
Google refused to reply to a list of questions that CNET News.com sent via e-
mail, including which sites have been delisted, how many sites have been
delisted, what standards are used, and what other Google-operated sites have
less-than-complete listings.
In an e-mail response, Google's Tyler said: "As a matter of company policy we
do not provide specific details about why or when we removed any one
particular site from our index. We occasionally receive notices from
partners, users, government agencies, and the like about sites in our index.
We carefully consider any credible complaint on a case-by-case basis and take
necessary action when needed. This is not pre-emptive--we only react to
requests that come to us...to avoid legal liability, we remove sites from
Google search results pages that may conflict with local laws."
Tyler said an internal team involving lawyers, management, and engineers
makes the final decision on what to remove. "At Google we take these types of
decisions very seriously," he said. "The objective is to limit legal exposure
while continuing to deliver high quality search results that enable our users
to find the information they need quickly and easily."
Tyler pointed to Google's terms of service agreement, which says Google
will "consider on a case-by-case basis requests" to remove links from its
index.
A moving target
Because Google has to keep track of a constantly moving target-new sites
arguably illegal under French or German law appear every day-the search
engine is encountering the same problems of over inclusiveness that
traditional filtering software has experienced.
According to the Harvard report, some sites that Google does not list include
1488.com, a "Chinese legal consultation network," and 14words.com, a discount
Web-hosting service and some conservative, anti-abortion religious sites.
Those sites do not appear to violate either German or French laws.
Banned from Google.de and Google.fr listings is Stormfront.org, one of the
Internet's most popular "white pride" sites. Stormfront features discussion
areas, a library of white nationalist articles and essays by David Duke, a
former Ku Klux Klan leader.
"We've been dealing with this for quite a few years," said Don Black, who
runs the site. "The German police agencies seem obsessed with Stormfro