Ohio Judge Won't Dismiss AG's Claim Google Is a Common Carrier
An Ohio judge’s refusal to dismiss a state lawsuit against Google suggests the search company could be subject to common carrier laws, the Ohio attorney general’s office said Thursday. Ohio’s lawsuit claimed Google is a carrier and public utility (see…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
2109140015). While not ruling Google is a common carrier, Common Pleas Court in Delaware County Judge James Schuck ruled Tuesday that Ohio “stated a cognizable claim" and declined to dismiss it. However, Schuck granted Google’s motion to dismiss Ohio's claim the company is a public utility. Google's "substantial market power" and that it provides service indiscriminately to any member of the public "weigh in favor of Google Search being a public utility," but other factors "point strongly in the opposite direction," including lack of statutory or regulatory oversight by Ohio, the judge said. Unlike with electricity or water, the public has no legal right to demand Google's search service, said Schuck: While "inarguably convenient and often used, it does not provide a fundamental life-essential service that the public has a right to demand and receive." Google might have substantial market share, but if it ceased business, competitors "would undoubtedly fill the void left by Google's departure,” he added. The judge punted on Google’s argument that Ohio’s requested relief would violate the company’s First Amendment free speech rights. The court "is unable to conclude at this juncture that it would be impossible for the State to demonstrate that the mere requirement that Google Search fairly return search results that are not slanted to its own products would unconstitutionally compel its association or speech,” he said. “That issue must be left for another day, after the parties have an opportunity to develop an evidentiary record." Google didn’t comment.