Duffy v Google: The Appeal

Duffy v Google 2016: The Appeal and Cross Appeal

Update October 2017: Google lost the appeal!

Google lost the case at trial and I set the highest global precedent in common law against a search engine. I was self represented and Google sent in all the legal power that a multi million dollar budget could buy. I walked in alone with my shopping trolly full of trial books – so exhausted that I could barely stand up. The trial was absolutely horrendous. The aftermath was horrible and included threats of harm and rape, false accusations of crime, online ridicule and even threats to hurt my dog sent to my blog, published online and even, after my home address was published by a Google shill, put in my letterbox. In early 2016 Google appealed. The Defendant lost!

I was represented by Paul Heywood-Smith QC and Ted Guthrie of Johnston Withers in Adelaide, South Australia. This law firm has a 70 year history of representing ordinary people (rather than corporate interests). This time I will be happily sitting in the gallery rather than the bar table.

The Defendant failed in its effort to keep trial evidence from Ripoff Report out of the appeal case books based on their ‘too much paper’ letter to the Supreme Court.

It appears that after more then 6 years, three law firms, three barristers and about AUD$1.5- $2 million in legal fees, the extra paper required to include the trial evidence from Ripoff Report in the Appeal Case Book was simply too much for the Defendant.

Since it is clear that the law on publication will be too difficult to overturn (it is not like Ripoff Report is some obscure little blog, unknown to Google) obviously the Defendant was going to try and try to hang me in the Appellate Court on the justification defence.

Needless to say, I was not impressed with these tactics and I tweeted my frustration:

The trial, in which I represented myself, was absolutely horrendous. I could barely stand up from exhaustion and distress on day one against all the expensive legal representation that Google can buy. But the Defendant lost.

Google should NOT have litigated a trial in which the website on which I was defamed, Ripoff Report is an extortion racket, enabled by the high Google page rank accorded to Ripoff Report.

I neither asked nor wanted this battle, a fact that the trial Justice made clear in this costs decision. The Defendant laid down the gauntlet, not me. I just wanted the links removed. Yet, Google is still trying to make me go away. 

I am NOT ready to back down. I will NEVER back down!

Google does not have the right  to come into our country, Australia, or to any other nation for that matter, and ignore our laws, our people and our rights in the untrammelled pursuit of profit! Google are the 21st c Robber Barons.