On February 2017, the judge of County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, grants an application for a warrant to search filed by Detective Lindman of Edina Police Department. The warrant is directed to search for any or all user or subscriber information related to the Google searches of the victim’s name and last name, three variations included, for the timeframe of December 1st, 2016, through January 7th, 2017.
AOL has recently settled its largest lawsuit prompted by the block of volunteers that performed online services for it during 1990s within the Community Leader Program. The program was ended by AOL in 2005 following US Department of Labor investigation.
Interflora Inc. and Interflora British Unit bring proceedings against Marks & Spencer plc concerning the display on the internet of M & S advertisements based on keywords corresponding to the trade mark Interflora, whose action is established for infringement of trade mark rights.
Genova first instance Court issues a judgement on July 17, 1999 in the matter of cybersquatting case as complained by Compaq. The application is granted for the implicit appropriation of the Altavista’s name worldwide importance by the means of the altavista.it domain, whose home page returns information related to the real search engine to make users believe they are browsing one of the greatest web indexes.
In the case of Google Inc v Duffy  SASFC 130 the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Australia on 4 October 2017 finds Google liable for the defamatory content of the hyperlinks and paragraphs resulting after the search of the respondent’s name on its own search engine service.
Chamber of the EU Court of Justice on 5 June 2014 holds judgement in case C-360/13 between Public Relations Consultants Association Ltd v Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd and others being requested for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU concerning the interpretation of Article 5(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001.
With a decision argued and submitted December 9, 2014 and filed September 25, 2015, the Ninth District Court of Appeals reverses and remands to a trial judge the ruling by the US District Court of Northern California in appeal case Pulaski & Middleman LLC v. Google because it erred to deny class-action status.
In the matter of Case 5:06-cv-02057-JF between KinderStart.com v. Google, on July 13th, 2006 US District Judge Jeremy Fogel for the Northern District in San Jose dismisses the lawsuit brought by UK search engine KinderStart.com.
The Court of Palermo IP Section, with ruling of June 7, 2013 in joined cases 11626/08 and 11627/08, definitively sentences on trademark infringement allegedly perpetrated by the means of Google’s service AdWords and on the supposed liability of the Internet Service Provider providing the advertising service. The Court finds that the illicit conduct affected only when the “dynamic keyword insertion” technique is implemented and thus it leads to ruling against the Defendant’s conduct for trademark infringement. Google’s liability is denied on the basis that the internet provider is not called to check the content of the whole advertisers’ ads.
The Board of Directors of Search Engine Marketing Professional Organization SEMPO on December 2012 sends a statement to the FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz having regard to search engine regulation and search labeling transparency.