In an unexpected turn of events, Google responded to a publisher’s claims of content appropriation, asserting that Google was “stealing” branded searches for its own benefit without adequate compensation to the publisher. The publisher expressed frustration over Google utilizing their content in rich results, seemingly minimizing the need for users to click through to the original source.

The publisher took to Twitter to showcase instances where Google was competing directly with them for regular keyword searches, utilizing the publisher’s content extensively. The complaint extended to Google’s use of AI-generated answers and rich results that essentially replicated entire blog posts, including original photos.

Expressing legal concerns, the publisher questioned the legality of Google’s actions, arguing that fair use does not apply when content is used to compete directly against the creator. The sentiment was echoed with a metaphor about projecting a movie on a wall outside a theater and earning money from it, claiming that fair use would not apply in such a scenario.

The publisher emphasized the considerable effort and resources invested in creating the content, including time spent in Denver, photographing attractions, and significant expenses. The central query revolved around how much value Google could extract from creators before creators decided it was unacceptable.

Google’s SearchLiaison, Danny Sullivan, responded to the accusations with an explanation of Google’s perspective. Sullivan, having a background as a publisher himself, acknowledged the publisher’s concerns and stated that he would share the feedback with the team. He clarified that the rich result, which included the entire content, also featured a link back to the publisher’s webpage.

Sullivan expressed personal reservations about the preview-to-click mechanism and suggested an option for direct clicks to the site. He reassured the publisher that their feedback would be conveyed to the search team, emphasizing the intention to make search better while supporting content creators.

The debate raises questions about the fairness and ethics of Google’s rich results and the perceived imbalance in benefit between Google and content creators. While there may be legal considerations, the subjective notion of fair play and the impact on publishers’ livelihoods remain significant concerns.