[burpingtree]

What don’t you understand? Those websites that defame a company are liable for that defamation. In this case Google defamed a company in its AI summary and is this liable for that defamation.

[riskd]

So if I edit a Wikipedia article to share that consuming poison is safe and someone consumes poison after reading it… is Wikipedia legally liable?

[eqvinox]

> is Wikipedia legally liable?

Probably not, because it's a similar situation where Wikipedia is accumulating user provided content. And people know Wikipedia can be freely edited.

You, however, might be liable. It's your content.

[anematode]

No, because Wikimedia isn't responsible for the behavior of its editors.

[incompatible]

Not for defamation, nobody was defamed in that scenario. But Wikipedia has been sued for defamation at least once:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_News_International_v._Wi...

[JumpCrisscross]

> is Wikipedia legally liable?

Directly? Quite possibly. They'd then have to transfer that liability to you.

[kevinxsun]

but if Wikipedia itself writes harmful content such as encouraging people to drink bleach, then wikipedia is liable. Google now generates its own content with AI, that defame others, so Google is liable.