The case is LTL LED LLC v. Google LLC (D. Minn.); see pp. 104 of this PDF onwards for the amended complaint. The lawsuit was filed in March in Minnesota trial court, but was just removed to federal court. The plaintiffs are the business and four of its officers, all of whom were also mentioned by name in some Google AI Overviews (assuming the exhibits attached to the Complaint are correct).
The Complaint claims that none of the sites linked to by the report actually reported that Wolf River had ever faced a Minnesota AG lawsuit, or was guilty of the other misconduct. According to the Complaint,
Google cited numerous sources in support of its false assertions; however, none of the referenced materials in fact contained the information Google claimed they did.
The Complaint also alleges specific lost business:
I did read the article. The person I'm replying to claims the entire debate was "uninformed hysteria", which means they thought the previous security model already required admin.
TikTok does not actually have many such videos since they get taken down far more aggressively than they do on, say, X/Twitter or Telegram. However, TikTok has the eyeballs of the vast majority of the young people and they talk about the ongoing atrocities nonstop, and it's crushed the image of both Israel and USA over the past 6 months. From that angle, it's a huge national interest issue for both the countries' ruling establishment to get the censorship level (and censorship priorities) of such topics on TikTok under better control.
Yep, exactly. Apologies, my previous comment was semi-sarcastic but in retrospect that was way too vague :)
On average, HN leans anti-MySQL, with concerns about Oracle ownership frequently cited in these discussions (mixed in with some historic distrust of MySQL problems that were solved long ago). But I rarely see the same sentiment being expressed about Citus, despite some obvious similarities to their ownership situation.
Personally I don't necessarily think the ownership is a huge problem/risk in either case, but I can understand why others feel differently.
Banks now have to order transactions / clearing in the way most beneficial to the consumer. One of the big items that passed under the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
With encrypted DNS queries becoming more popular, it is impossible to block something at the router level without decrypting the packets which bring up more privacy concerns.