It is not user submitted. These shitresults are made by Google, by their servers. They chose to put it there, knowing it may be inaccurate. So they are fully responsible.

It seems obvious to me that there's a huge gap between a search result, which is a link and an excerpt where the operator of the linked site is clearly responsible for the content, and an AI overview, which mixes information from multiple sources with generated nonsense.

Google should absolutely be liable if it generates overviews containing defamatory lies.

I actually want to find out how Google will get out of this one. Without any type of lobbying. Even in the u.s ai search promp resualts are technically considered Googles own speech and they are legally responsible. Sadly no one in government seems interested in enforcing ai and even where there is there is this push to take the power from the states to regulate ai.

Has there ever been a litigation that Google has lost that they didn't appeal if appeal were available?

All AI companies ahould have this liability. They know without a shadow of a doubt that they can't make the AI stop hallucinating. This should have never been released to the public until they fixed this glaring problem.

Or they link to the real sources that might be incorrect to shift the blame, but then those sources can charge for using their data what's even worse in the AI scraping era.

Or, you know, Google could go back to its link-ranking system for now until it figures out how to keep AI from hallucinating.

AI is still premature. Experimental. It should be regarded as such, like an early-access game.