They most certainly should be, because an automated Google system having "flagged" a user as "a terrorist" means nothing in the eyes of the law. On the other hand, they should not in any way be without liability for wrongly suspending a user's account just because their automated system unjustifiably "flagged" them.
>they should not in any way be without liability for wrongly suspending a user's account just because their automated system unjustifiably "flagged" them.
A legal team of 1,000+ at google is betting that you're wrong. I have a feeling they came to a pretty logical decision that liability of aiding someone flagged of terrorist activity is greater than liability of shutting down someone to whom you owe nothing.
