John Battelle finds thinks the case Google vs KinderStart “reads wrong“:

“Because it suited the defense, the lawyer decided to argue that Google’s index was subjective – ie, that Google made editorial decisions about each site’s quality. Google readers understand that the site’s ranking system is subjective and based on Google’s opinion about whether a site is worth viewing. Google’s opinion? Really? Huh. That’s a new one“.

I’m surprised anyone would think that Google’s SERPs could be anything other than subjective. The computer is sorting data based on algorithms – created and tweaked by humans. The same humans who decided on over 100, highly subjective, ranking (read: editorial) criteria.

Inherently subjective, imho.

I can’t see this case producing much that’s new, but given the legal system, there’s always the chance, eh.