Ohio, Google Clash on Defining Common Carrier
An Ohio court can and should call Google Search a common carrier, the state argued Friday. "Ohio common carrier law needs no expansion … Google Search meets each and every criterion with no need to resort to the creative interpretation…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
that Google proposes." In a separate opposition brief, Google protested that it’s nothing like a common carrier: "Google is not a 'dumb pipe' or 'mere conduit.' Ohio and Google responded to each other’s January cross-motions for summary judgment in case 21-CV-H-06-0274 at the Ohio Court of Common Pleas, Delaware County (see 2401260074). Reply briefs are due March 15 and trial is set for Sept. 3 under the court’s schedule. Judge James Schuck refused to dismiss Ohio’s lawsuit in May 2022, ruling that Ohio “stated a cognizable claim” that Google could be a common carrier (see 2205260057). The Ohio Chamber of Commerce supported the company in a Thursday amicus brief, arguing that Ohio’s attempt to regulate the search company would be “anti-business.” Concerns about how a big tech company participates in public discourse "provide no basis for making a novel exception to well-established common carrier tenets,” wrote the chamber.