A line has been finally been drawn under an Adelaide woman’s 12-year legal battle against global tech giant Google after she sued the company twice, mostly unrepresented, and won.
Key points:
- Dr Janice Duffy successfully argued in 2015 and 2023 that Google published defamatory extracts
- She reached a confidential settlement with the company which would pay her damages and legal costs
- She said it’s never been about the money, but holding Google accountable.
Dr Janice Duffy successfully argued in 2015 and 2023 that Google published defamatory extracts from American website RipOff Report on its search engine page, despite her notifying the company and asking for the posts to be removed.
She was set to start her damages trial on Monday for her most recent case but reached a confidential settlement with the multibillion-dollar company, which would pay her damages and legal costs.
It’s the second time the company will be coughing up, after she received over $100,000 in damages in 2015.
The former SA Government researcher said it’s never been about the money, but holding Google accountable.
“Google made me feel like I was worth nothing,” Dr Duffy said.
“They just made me feel like I was this nothing human being – because I stood up to them.”
A dark place
Dr Duffy said the nightmare began after first discovering defamatory information about her on the widely-used platform.
“I found it very difficult to leave the house, I used to lay on the couch and watch documentaries about serial killers to make me feel normal,” she said.
She joined a volunteer dog rescuing network during that dark time.
“I started it because, basically I wanted someone to look after my dog – if I didn’t survive it and I honestly didn’t think I was going to survive it.”
She contemplated taking her life, saying it destroyed her career in research.
But she said she pulled together all the strength she had ahead of her first trial, when she realised she would have to represent herself with dwindling finances to afford legal fees.
“It was just horrific — truly horrific — when I realised I had to do the trial myself… the only things that I had was an old printer and my research skills,” she said.
Google used the defence of innocent dissemination, but even after her David and Goliath-like feat, similar defamatory information continued to appear on the site after her first case.
Fighting back
Paul Heywood-Smith KC helped Dr Duffy after her initial proceeding.
“[Google] lost the case, but in their arrogance they continued to broadcast it and Janice Duffy wasn’t prepared to accept that.”
Mr Heywood-Smith says her triumphs after fighting the giant mostly unrepresented — are remarkable.
“Google has the capacity to deep pocket anyone –make their legal costs and the costs of litigating so expensive that most people couldn’t even contemplate it,” he said.
The recently retired KC said Dr Duffy’s landmark wins could assist other potential plaintiffs.
“When somebody goes into their solicitor and asks, ‘have I got a case?’ and the solicitor goes to the law on defamation — they will see the case of Duffy against Google and it’s clear cut — and so she’s done a wonderful service.”
Emotional toll
Independent expert in technology and law, Joel Lisk from Flinders University, said there may not be a large amount of similar proceedings in Australia — given the expense, time and emotional toll it would take on potential plaintiffs.
“It should be the approach of last resort – you should be able to settle these matters or request Google to remove them – but it does strengthen the defamation position here in Australia.”
He says Dr Duffy’s case could put more responsibility on search engine companies to monitor what appears on its websites more closely.
“Following this proceeding, Google will likely look at the judgement and take steps and look at how it manages and produces data – but there’s only so many things you can do without significant technological innovation.”
Google did not respond in time to the ABC’s request for comment on Dr Duffy’s case.