A court just made Google the author of its AI's mistakes
A German court (Regional Court of Munich, case 26 O 869/26) ruled that Google's AI answers are its own words, not neutral search links — making the platform the author of what its AI invents about a business, your hotel included
The disclaimer everyone leaned on. "AI can make mistakes. Check important info." That line sat under every AI answer, and it did quiet work: it treated the answer as a pass-through, something the reader was supposed to verify, not something the platform stood behind. A German court just refused to accept it.
What Munich actually held. The Regional Court of Munich issued a temporary injunction (case 26 O 869/26) barring Google from repeating false claims about two Munich publishers in its AI Overviews. The AI had tied them to scams and dubious business practices — and, the court found, made claims that appeared in none of the linked sources. It invented the accusations. The court's reasoning is the part that travels: an AI Overview is not a list of links, it "rewrites and judges results in its own words and according to its own structure," so it counts as Google's own content. That made Google a direct infringer. The "users can verify through the cited links" defense was rejected, because the answer presents itself as complete. The old rules that give ordinary search results and autocomplete a lighter liability were rejected too.
Why it reaches your hotel. Your property is described by these answers every day — a rate, a rating, a one-line summary, sometimes a confident "known for." When the answer is right, no one thinks about it. When it invents — conflates you with a different hotel down the road, asserts a closure that never happened, summarizes a policy you never wrote — the question has always been who you go to. A review site hosts other people's words. The algorithm is a closed box. What this ruling does is name an author: the platform that wrote the paragraph. In one German courtroom, "the AI said it, not us" did not survive.
The catch. This is a preliminary injunction, not a final judgment. It is one German court applying German law, and Google confirmed on June 12 that it will appeal. And the case is about two publishers, not a hotel — the principle is what carries, not a hotel outcome you can point to yet. It also doesn't arrive alone: the EU AI Act's transparency rules for user-facing AI take effect August 2, and the UK's competition regulator has already forced an AI Overviews opt-out. The question of who owns the AI answer is being pushed on several fronts at once.
For years the AI summary sat above your listing as something no one quite owned — the platform's when it helped, nobody's when it didn't. A court just assigned it an owner.
Enjoying this analysis? Hospitality.today delivers daily insights on hotel distribution, AI trends, and travel commerce — straight to your inbox. Subscribe for free at Hospitality.today →