Each quarter, Google issues a brief summary of the legal threats it faces through its quarterly SEC 10-Q filings.

Here’s that part of Google’s 10-Q Filing for September 30, 2008.

Note 11. Contingencies

Legal Matters

Companies have filed trademark infringement and related claims against us over the display of ads in response to user queries that include trademark terms. The outcomes of these lawsuits have differed from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. We currently have three cases pending at the European Court of Justice, which will address questions regarding whether advertisers and search engines can be held liable for use of trademarked terms in keyword advertising. We are litigating, or have recently litigated similar issues in other cases, in the U.S., Australia, Austria, Brazil, China, France, Germany, Israel, and Italy.

We have also had copyright claims filed against us by companies alleging that features of certain of our products and services, including Google Web Search, Google News, Google Video, Google Image Search, Google Book Search and YouTube, infringe their rights. In the U.S. we recently announced a settlement with the Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers (“AAP”) (see Note 15), however this class action is subject to approval by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and we are subject to additional claims with respect to Google Book Search in other parts of the world. Adverse results in these lawsuits may include awards of substantial monetary damages, costly royalty or licensing agreements or orders preventing us from offering certain functionalities, and may also result in a change in our business practices, which could result in a loss of revenue for us or otherwise harm our business. In addition, any time one of our products or services links to or hosts material in which others allegedly own copyrights, we face the risk of being sued for copyright infringement or related claims. Because these products and services comprise the majority of our products and services, our business could be harmed in the event of an adverse result in any of these claims.

…

Although the results of litigation and claims cannot be predicted with certainty, we believe that the final outcome of the matters discussed above will not have a material adverse effect on our business, consolidated financial position, results of operations and cash flows.

Google is a legal lightning rod because it’s highly profitable and extremely visible. That puts Google in the position of litigating many of Silicon Valley’s legal issues.  On the EFF blog, Fred von Lohmann suggests that the recent AAP settlement signals those days are ending.

The Web Guild reports that Google is quietly laying off up to 10,000 staff. This report is now being picked up by larger news outlets.  Citing anonymous sources, Web Guild says that part of the layoff includes 500 recruiters. Though Google is cutting back, its method is stealthy.

Though Google reports just over 21,000 full-time staff, it has over 9,000 workers. These non-permanent workers aren’t reported to Wall Street. Since one third of the work force is unreported, this accentuates Googles profit per person.

According to the Web Guild article, the majority of these workers have been with Google more than five years. However, their temporary status allows Google to avoid providing benefits, or having to report their dismissal in layoff announcements. Announcement or not, Google appears to be making cuts; potentially up to a third of its workforce.

Give Food to the Hungry by Answering Vocabulary Questions
The World Food Programme has recognized the website Free Rice for generating enough support to feed two million people per day. The ad-driven site offers a range of games, but instead of scoring points, participants score grains of rice to be donated by the site’s sponsors.

Airlines to Get Net Access = Airline Travelers Get Porn
The Technology Liberation Front posts three potential solutions to a problem that doesn’t yet exist: flightmates openly watching adult content on airplanes. Flights could provide privacy screens, family-friendly seating sections, or family-friendly sites. Or airlines could just filter content. Of course, this doesn’t prevent travelers bringing their own entertainment on iPods or laptops.

FindLaw’s Reputation Slapped Down by Google
Todd Friesen’s blog has an exposé about how FindLaw, the #1 online destination serving legal professionals, has outright sold links as an search engine optimization service. This practice was reportedly punished by Google, who recently slapped down FindLaw’s page rank from a 7 (highly reputable) to a 5, which is, well, what this blog is. (My research shows FindLaw still has a rank of 7, so Google’s punishment is unconfirmed.)

Online Ride Sharing Service Banned in Canada
Michael Geist blogs about an outdated Canadian law which has been used by a bus company to prevent PickupPal, an online ride matching service. He warns that the law needs to recognize the organizing potential of online communities, and that in the future organized customers will compete with the businesses who seek to serve them.

Sarah Palin’s Stealthy Wikipedia Makeover
Reporters are looking for stories about Palin; one was that her Wikipedia listing was cleaned up with over 30 edits just before her nomination as the Republican VP candidate. When you’re trying to define a candidate, rewriting her history is an easy first step.

A Pittsburgh couple is suing Google on the grounds that their privacy was invaded by the dilettante search company during the capturing of street images to be incorporated in Google’s Street View software.The filed complaint can be seen here at The Smoking Gun.

At issue is whether or not the “Google gander van” was in violation of the reasonable expectation of privacy when it ventured down a supposedly marked private road.

According to IT News, Google’s response to the lawsuit is predictable and off the mark:

“Today’s satellite image technology means that even in today’s desert, complete privacy does not exist,” says Google’s submission.

“In any event, the Plaintiffs live far away from the desert and are far from hermits.”

Not only does Google attempt to dismiss privacy concerns by conflating its Street View technology with satellite imagery, but it misses the point of the suit’s premise of reasonable expectation of privacy through the act of trespassing.

Continued

We were describing the need to understand video search as a new arena of legal interest. Gotuit Media Inc., has sued Microsoft, claiming Silverlight infringes on three of its patents that involve making movies searchable.

The Gotuit software allows for the insertion of searchable text data into a movie. Silverlight also allows for the insertion of data for the same purpose, which the refer to simply as metadata.

Gotuit is seeking an injunction preventing Microsoft from using their Silverlight technology on an NBC website dedicated for the upcoming 2008 Olympics in Beijing.

If granted, it could certainly put a lot of web developers into overtime. However, it’s likely to force a settlement in a timely manner: something less than 4 weeks, I’d imagine. Xie xie, Gotuit.

Editor’s note: Copyright and trademark cases are being defined by evolving search and video capabilities. Anyone interested in online law and search should follow the evolving ability of search engines to consume multimedia content.

Flash is a wonderful tool for grabbing attention on the web. It can even be used to construct entire web pages that look and operate as desktop applications and are incredibly interactive in nature. However, its Achilles’ heel has always been the fact that content buit in Flash is virtually invisible to search engines. Until now.

Adobe has built a special type of Flash player, explicitly for search engines, which operates like a user, stepping through the interactivity of the embedded Flash object just like a person would. Think of it as a Flashbot. Did I just coin a term?

Continued

On the day Microsoft announced its plan to acquire Yahoo back in February, I posted my doubts that Microhoo would be established within a year, which was then the media and company line.

While supporting Carl Icahn’s proxy fight and pressuring Yahoo’s board may get a Yahoo deal on the table, this will also underscore the anti-competitive concerns of regulators in both markets. The EU is still phobic about Microsoft’s domination of the desktop, and US courts are still supervising the firm for anti-competitive activities.

Yahoo’s sounds of capitulation moved its market valuation by about 12% yesterday, even without a specific proposal on the table. However, the street would be wise to price in the increased risk and delay of regulatory approval, which based on these week’s strong-arm tactics is likely to further increase.

Nike has filed a trademark infringement lawsuit against Eastern Mountain Sports (EMS) in the Federal District Court for the District of Oregon over the use of the term “Dri-FIT.” Dri-FIT is a trademark of Nike.

Continued

North Oaks, Minnesota, population 4,500, has sent Google Maps a big message:

“Go away, and don’t come back.”

You see, in North Oaks the roads are privately owned by the residents. So when the Googlemobile toured North Oaks and photographed people’s homes from the street, it was technically trespassing. That’s what the North Oaks City Council claimed in a letter sent to Google, which requested that the company remove the images and destroy the files or potentially be cited for violating the city’s trespassing ordinance.

Continued

Corynne McSherry and Eric Goldman have posted a joint warning about proposals being considered by the the Trademark Litigation subcommittee of the American Bar Association’s IP Section.  Several expert sources (quoted below) have already written about this, and I add some thoughts to theirs after that.

Continued