‘AI Overviews can no longer just be helpful summaries. Now, they must be legally defendable outputs,’ said Forrester principal analyst Nikhil Lai.

A landmark German ruling has determined that Google’s AI Overview are its own words, holding the company liable over statements Overview generated about two German publishers.

The Regional Court of Munich found that the AI Overview search tool was generating false claims about the two plaintiffs, including that they committed fraud and lured customers into subscription traps.

The court hit Google with a temporary injunction, banning the company from spreading false claims about the plaintiffs. Google has been ordered to pay 80pc of the legal costs, while the plaintiffs will each pay 10pc of the costs.

The court pinned responsibility on the search giant, reasoning that the AI used by Google independently compiles and summarises information, creating search results that go beyond just links.

It ruled that only Google has influence over the AI used in Overviews, as well as the algorithms with which it operates – meaning it must be held accountable for its results. It also said that the Overview search results about the plaintiffs included statements not even made in the search results.

“We invest deeply in the quality of AI Overviews to ensure that the overwhelming majority of responses provide accurate information, and they are designed to reflect the information that exists on the web. We’re carefully reviewing this decision, which is not yet final,” Google told Android Authority in a statement.

The Munich regional court’s ruling went a step further, examining existing rulings from Germany’s Federal Court of Justice (BGH), which gave search engines and autocomplete limited liability.

According to the BGH, search engines are only liable as indirect infringers because they disseminate information already created by third-party content publishers.

However, the Munich court said that this doesn’t apply to AI Overviews, as it “makes independent, new and substantive statements based on an evaluation and linking of content from various third-party websites” – rather than a traditional search engine which points to external sites.

Google argued in proceedings that users should not blindly trust information generated in AI Overviews. While the court agreed that users can check links and ensure the validity of the information they receive, it said that that shouldn’t relieve the company of liability.

“AI Overviews can no longer just be helpful summaries,” said Nikhil Lai, a principal analyst at Forrester. “Now, they must be legally defendable outputs.

“I think we’ll see fewer assertive, highly confident claims and more hedging, including language like ‘according to…’ and ‘some sources suggest…’.”

Lai also expects that fewer queries searching for sensitive information such as financial, health or legal advice would result in AI Overviews.

“This is not a Google-specific problem. I think this will lead to the value of defensible AI, where information’s verifiability and traceability become more valuable than its polish.”

Last year, a group of independent publishers filed an antitrust complaint with the European Commission, arguing that Google’s AI Overview diverts traffic away from independent publishers, resulting in less readership and advertising revenue.

Last week, the UK’s competition regulator ordered Google to let publishers opt out of having their content used to power AI features in search, including AI Overviews.

Don’t miss out on the knowledge you need to succeed. Sign up for the Daily Brief, Silicon Republic’s digest of need-to-know sci-tech news.