<p>
    <!--break-->
  </p>
  
  <p>
    I would be falsely modest if I said that I am not proud that our pleadings have been entirely endorsed by a panel of three highly authoritative judges. The facts are simple and very well described in the order. Basically, typing in the Google search field &#8220;Name Surname&#8221; of my client, the <strong>autocompletion</strong> and the &#8220;<strong>suggested searches</strong>&#8221; (now &#8220;related searches&#8221;) offered to complete it with &#8220;con man&#8221; (&#8220;<em>truffatore</em>&#8220;) and &#8220;fraud&#8221; (&#8220;<em>truffa</em>&#8220;), which caused a lot of trouble to the client, who has a pulic image both as an entrepeneur and provider of educational services in the field of personal finance. Google argued that it could not be held liable because it is a hosting provider, but we showed that this is content <em>produced</em> by them (and by the way, they <em>do</em> filter out certain content, including terms that are know to be used to distribute copyright infringing material), although through automated means. Therefore in this case the search engine cannot avail itself of the safe harbour provision of the Ecommerce Directive.
  </p>
</div>