While I agree that this is appalling, I think the article misses the point entirely: she got sued, and lost, not because of her criticisms, but because she told people not to go to that restaurant. The former is fine and a proud part of France's cultural heritage while the later is, unfortunately, illegal: it's considered to be active steps to hurt a business or person.
So while, technically, she did get sued because her article was highly ranked on Google, what really happened was that the article's high google rank allowed her illegal article to be spotted.
Whether or not it should have been illegal in the first place is entirely debatable, but given current french laws, the fact that she was sued and lost is perfectly logical.
And before the whole "but but... freedom of expression!" crowd comes in: that is not a thing in France. There are some subjects that are illegal to talk about - you could, for example, go to jail for denying the existence of concentration camps (Gayssot law of 2005, I believe).
So while, technically, she did get sued because her article was highly ranked on Google, what really happened was that the article's high google rank allowed her illegal article to be spotted.
Whether or not it should have been illegal in the first place is entirely debatable, but given current french laws, the fact that she was sued and lost is perfectly logical.
And before the whole "but but... freedom of expression!" crowd comes in: that is not a thing in France. There are some subjects that are illegal to talk about - you could, for example, go to jail for denying the existence of concentration camps (Gayssot law of 2005, I believe).