News

Google wins landmark case to limit ‘right to be forgotten’ to Europe

LUXEMBOURG (Reuters) – Google (GOOGL.D) do not apply Europe’s “right to be forgotten” law in the global, the continent’s highest court ruled Tuesday in a landmark case that pitted privacy rights against the freedom of speech and expression.

FILE PHOTO: Visitors of the logo on Google’s high-profile, high-tech start-ups and business leaders, the meeting, Tour-Tech,Paris, France-May 16, 2019 at the latest. REUTERS/Charles Platiau/File Photo

The victory of the US-based tech titan means that it must remove links to personal information from internet search results in Europe, where it is necessary, it does not have to destroy them to search anywhere else in the world.

The case was seen as a landmark test of a new era of an internet that knows no boundaries, or they may ask for a blanket removal of information about themselves from the search without stifling the freedom of expression and the genuine public interest.

It is also seen by policy-makers and businesses around the world as well as a test of whether the European Union can extend its laws beyond its own borders.

“At the moment, there is no obligation under EU law to search engine operators, who grants a request for referral is made by a person, in order to provide for the referral of all versions of the engine, that the Court of Justice of the European Union, said in the statement.

Google welcomed the decision, saying: “It’s good to see that the court agreed with our arguments.”

The world’s most popular search engines on the internet have been warned of the dangers of overreach by the european union. In a blog post from two years ago, he said, there needs to be a balance between the private and confidential information, and is in the public interest, and that no country should be able to impose rules on the citizens of another.

The right to be forgotten established by the European court of justice, in 2014, when the court of justice ruled that people could ask search engines such as Google, to remove inadequate or irrelevant information in the web search results under a search for their names.

Google, as a unit, a-z, Inc., as well as receiving 845,501 request to remove up to 45 percent of an estimated 3.3 million was requested in to the spread.

PRIVACY VS. SPEECH

UK rights group, Article 19, which campaigns for freedom of speech and freedom of information, welcomed Tuesday’s verdict, which also said that Google had some leeway in determining whether scrap metal is on the left because of the balance between privacy rights and the public interest.

“The courts or to the data regulators in the united kingdom, France, and Germany may not be in a position to find out from the search results to internet users in the Americas, India, and Argentina, to see it,” he said.

“The court held, it is accurate to say that the balance between privacy and freedom of expression need to be taken into account in the decision on the sites should be on the list, and also to acknowledge the fact that this balance may vary over the entire world.”

However, Patrick Van Eecke, worldwide president of data protection practice at law firm DLA Piper, said that it would reduce the impact of a successful right to be forgotten applies if the separate searches are carried out within the European Union.

“This is, of course, can be frustrating for people to see that people from outside of Europe, you will still be able to find out from the list of search results by performing search on Google, in New York, New York, Shanghai or any other place in the world,” he added.

The case was made in 2016, after France’s privacy watchdog, the CNIL, fined Google € 100,000 ($109,790) for the object to the list of sensitive information from the search results, worldwide, on request.

Google took the fight to the French Council of State, who then sought advice from the European Court of Justice.

The Board separately and asking for advice, after the CNIL has decided not to go to Google to remove links from internet search results on the basis of the names of the four people.

This cover is a satirical photo-montage of a female politician, or an article, to refer to a person as a public relations officer for the Church of Scientology, in the place of an examination from a male politician, and it is the conviction of a person for a sexual assault against a minor.

The CNIL said that it would be in line with a Tuesday court ruling.

Reporting by Foo Yun Chee; Additional reporting by Gwenaelle Barzic in Paris; Editing by Gabriela Baczynska and Pravin Char

Follow us

Don't be shy, get in touch. We love meeting interesting people and making new friends.

Most popular