Skip to main content

Max Mosley: Why I took on Google over orgy images

By Max Mosley, Special for CNN
updated 7:41 AM EST, Fri November 8, 2013
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  • French court orders search engine Google to remove Max Mosley orgy pictures
  • Courts had previously ruled the images must not be shown
  • Max Mosley: Images he fought to establish were illegal, continually reappear on Google
  • I think there is something seriously wrong with the culture at Google - Mosley

Editor's note: Max Mosley, former chief executive of Formula 1's governing body the FIA, successfully sued News of the World after the now-defunct British tabloid weekly wrongly alleged he had engaged in a Nazi-themed sex orgy. He is a frequent commentator on media practices.

London (CNN) -- I am pleased and relieved that the court in Paris finally found in my favor this week in my case against Google. With hundreds of pages of court documents, mainly generated by Google lawyers, you would have thought my case against them was complicated. It's not. The point is very simple.

It concerns nine illegally acquired pictures which courts in the UK and France have previously ruled should not be shown.

If someone posts one of these pictures somewhere in the world, Google's search engine will automatically find and display it. However Google will take the picture and its link down whenever they are asked to do so.

As they themselves say, they have done this many times for me and for others. The problem is that having removed a picture following receipt of notice from me, their search simply replaces the picture with another taken from a different webpage.

The images, which I fought so hard to establish were illegal, continually reappear courtesy of Google.

Given that they are prepared to take a specific illegal picture down manually once it has been identified, why not do so automatically? They have the software to recognize specific pictures.

Indeed they make the tool freely available on their homepage. So why not use it? They know exactly which pictures are involved because we have repeatedly identified them. All I was asking was that, automatically rather than manually, they stop displaying these specific and known pictures and providing links to them.

This seemed to me an obvious and simple request. It is what the French court has now ordered them to do.

It also seemed to me to be in Google's own interest. Surely they would not want the trouble of dealing manually with endless take-down requests when they already had the software to identify specific images and could block them automatically. Was this not exactly the sort of thing computers do and Google are particularly good at? It is very difficult to understand why Google should fight tooth and nail to resist doing automatically something they are fully prepared to do manually.

You may be wondering why I decided to fight the case when it was obvious the primary result would be to draw attention to precisely those pictures I wanted to get rid of
Max Mosley

To begin with, Google argued that they didn't have the software. Then they said, OK, they could develop the software but there was some great principle involved in blocking a picture, notwithstanding that they must already do this for indecent images of children and other illegal images and information.

Then they said it might inadvertently block something legitimate -- obvious nonsense given that we are dealing with a small number of specific pictures.

Then they tried to mix this up with cases where a person wanted something objectionable removed without a court decision.

Then they suggested we were asking them to exercise judgment - again obvious nonsense given the court decisions that already existed about these specific pictures.

Finally, they claimed they were defending free speech. But it's the courts which said the pictures were illegal and should not be shown, so the issue is the rule of law, not freedom of speech.

I think that there is something seriously wrong with the culture at Google. The technical side is brilliant and extremely useful. There are some extraordinarily gifted people working on the technical side and coming up with ideas and then the software to exploit them.

Yet the non-technical management, particularly in the legal department, seems to be irrational to the point of becoming adolescent. It's almost as if they refuse to do something entirely sensible, and which would save them and others time and trouble, for no better reason than that someone asked them to.

In the end, it's about obeying the law and having respect for the rule of law. There is absolutely nothing wrong with observing the law automatically, quite the reverse.

There must be some rational people at the top of Google. You would expect them to respect the rights of the individual once established in a court of law. They should insist their legal department do the same.

But you may be wondering why I decided to fight the case when it was obvious the primary result would be to draw attention to precisely those pictures I wanted to get rid of. There are two reasons.

First, unless the pictures are blocked automatically, I or my lawyers will have to monitor the web in perpetuity.

Second, the principle that an individual is able to rely on the rule of law to enforce his or her rights is, I think, of fundamental importance.

This should apply no matter who is the opponent or what their business. I hope that this judgment helps establish that principle in respect of online publications and that it may be of use to others in the future.

The opinions expressed in this column are solely those of Max Mosley.

ADVERTISEMENT
Part of complete coverage on
updated 2:26 AM EDT, Thu April 24, 2014
A year ago, 1,000 garment workers died in the collapse of Rana Plaza building in Bangladesh. Here's a look at what has changed since then.
updated 12:53 AM EDT, Thu April 24, 2014
Focus is on the fish as U.S. President starts tour with visit to legendary Tokyo restaurant.
updated 1:23 PM EDT, Wed April 23, 2014
Fireworks are fantastic and human endeavor has its place, but sometimes Mother Nature outshines any performance we can produce.
updated 11:06 PM EDT, Wed April 23, 2014
In 1987, China sent its very first email. Here's what it said,
updated 10:13 PM EDT, Wed April 23, 2014
The world's new fastest elevator will fling you from earth to the 95th floor before you're done reading this article.
updated 4:12 PM EDT, Wed April 23, 2014
In one U.S. state, a new bill will allow ordinary citizens to carry guns in all sorts of places. Does it make you feel safer?
updated 10:10 AM EDT, Mon April 21, 2014
In South Korea, volunteer divers are risking their lives to rescue victims of the sunken ferry.
updated 3:15 PM EDT, Wed April 23, 2014
Park Jee Young, 22, helped passengers escape as the Sewol ferry sank -- giving out life jackets while refusing to wear one herself.
updated 12:43 PM EDT, Tue April 22, 2014
What did outgoing manager David Moyes get wrong in his six months with English Premier League football team Manchester United?
updated 1:36 PM EDT, Wed April 23, 2014
In honor of Shakespeare's birthday, here are 15 of the world's most amazing theaters.
updated 1:34 PM EDT, Tue April 22, 2014
CNN exclusive: Australian officials are hammering out a new agreement for widening the Flight 370 search area.
updated 8:28 AM EDT, Tue April 22, 2014
Malaysian officials sent to brief Chinese families are armed with little to no information.
updated 11:45 AM EDT, Tue April 22, 2014
When a team of Indian surgeons opened up the stomach of a 63-year-old man, they had no idea they'd extract a fortune.
updated 3:01 AM EDT, Tue April 22, 2014
Do these photos CNN of gun-toting men wearing green uniforms prove Russian forces are in eastern Ukraine?
updated 1:11 PM EDT, Wed April 23, 2014
If the Duchess wears it, then your fashion career is sorted for life.
updated 1:29 PM EDT, Thu April 24, 2014
Browse through images you don't always see on news reports from CNN teams around the world.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT