UK Expands Right To Be Forgotten

The UK’s Information Commissioner’s Office has decided that the “right to be forgotten” must be implemented on any search engine accessible from within the UK, not just the European versions of those services (such as google.co.uk).  This follows a decision by France’s data protection authority CNIL (Commission Nationale de l’Informatique et des Libertés) earlier this year ordering Google to remove links to objectionable search results on all its domains worldwide rather than only on EU domains (such as google.fr).  The EU’s Article 29 Working Party has also issued statements to the same effect.  In a November 2 blog post, the UK’s ICO announced that it had amended its first enforcement notice in a right-to-be-forgotten case so that it now requires Google to remove search results “from all versions of the Google search service directly accessible from within the UK.”

© Copyright 2015 Steptoe & Johnson LLP

International: The Right To Forget Metadata

The UK’s Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has enforced the European cyber law’s “right to be forgotten” against Google over search results linked to a minor crime committed by an individual ten years ago.  Last month, the ICO released an enforcement notice ordering the search engine to remove within 35 days nine links associated with the individual’s crime.  In some respects, the decision represents an expansion of the right as it involves removing links to articles about Google's removal of articles about the individual. 

If you need assistance on submitting a request to remove certain information about you from the search engines, then contact Gerrie van Gaalen

© Copyright 2015 Steptoe & Johnson LLP

International:Russia Enacts Right To Be Forgotten Law

Russia has enacted a law requiring search engines to remove website links containing inaccurate, outdated, or unlawfully released personal information.  Much like the European Court of Justice’s ruling in May 2014 establishing a “right to be forgotten” in the EU, Federal Law No. 264-FZ allows Russian citizens to request that search engines remove website links from search results if they contain information that is false, outdated, or violates Russian law.  However, the law does not apply to information about criminal offenses or to search engines operated by federal and municipal authorities.  Individuals may file lawsuits against the search engines if their requests are denied.  The law, which was signed by President Vladimir Putin on July 14, takes effect on January 1, 2016.

© Copyright 2015 Steptoe & Johnson LLP

Google in quandary over upholding EU ruling

Google and other Internet companies find themselves in a quandary over how to strike a balance between privacy and freedom of information as the top world search engine took a first step towards upholding an EU privacy ruling.

Google moved overnight to put up an online form that will allow European citizens to request that links to obsolete information be taken down – its first response to the ruling by Europe's top court on "the right to be forgotten".

The ruling on 13 May upheld a 1995 European law ondata protection and ordered Google to remove links to a 1998 newspaper article about the repossession of a Spanish man's home.

After putting up the online form in the early hours of Friday, Google received 12 000 requests across Europe, sometimes averaging 20 per minute, by late in the day, the company said.That puts Google and other Internet companies in the position of having to interpret the court's broad criteria for information that is "inadequate, irrelevant or no longer relevant" as well as developing criteria for distinguishing public figures from private individuals.

"The court's ruling requires Google to make difficult judgements about an individual's right to be forgotten and the public's right to know," a Google spokesman said.

Digital rights campaigners say the EU authorities need to agree on a common approach to guide the search engine companies.Next week representatives from the EU's 28 data protection authorities are due to discuss the implications of the ruling at a two-day meeting.

"Companies should not be tasked with balancing fundamental rights or making decisions on the appropriateness, lawfulness, or relevance of information they did not publish," said Raegan MacDonald, European policy manager at Access, a digital rights organisation.

By Reuters
Brussels, 2 Jun 2014

Definitely a discussion to follow in terms of privacy vs. freedom of information.  What are your thoughts on this?

EU: Search engine results to be removed where they affect privacy rights

ECJ confirms right to have search engine results removed where they affect privacy rights

The ECJ has ruled on three questions concerning the interpretation of the Data Protection Directive (1995/46/EC) with regard to the data processing activities of search engine providers, their status as data controllers and the existence and scope of a right to be forgotten, in a reference from a Spanish court. The proceedings had been brought by a Spanish citizen, who had asked that Google remove from the list of search results based on his name links to two announcements in a Spanish newspaper from 1998. The announcements concerned a real-estate auction connected with attachment proceedings prompted by the applicant's social security debts. The ECJ held that a search engine provider is the data controller in respect of the locating, indexing, storing and making available of information accessible on the internet, and that the applicant has a right to rectification, erasure or blocking of that information, and a right to object to the processing of the information in certain circumstances.

The ECJ made it clear that while the search engine's commercial interests in processing the information will not, as a rule, override the data subject's rights to privacy and data protection, a balancing of the data subject's fundamental rights and the interests of other internet users in accessing that information must be carried out. The interest in the continued accessibility of personal information may override the data subject's interest in cases where the data subject plays a prominent role in public life and the accessibility of the information is in the public interest. The ECJ further clarified that the data subject's right to request removal of the relevant links may also apply if the information is true and where its original publication was lawful. This is particularly the case where the information has since become inadequate, irrelevant or excessive.

The ECJ's decision has sent shock waves not only through the online industry but also through the loose collection of groups concerned with the protection of digital rights. While the strengthening of the EU's right to apply its data protection framework to non-EU data controllers in certain circumstances is broadly welcomed (within the EU, if not in the US, where many of the largest, most popular search engines are based), the importance that the court has afforded to the data subject's right to privacy, compared to the right of individuals to access to information, has led to accusations that the decision legitimises individual reputation management, the falsification of historical records and ultimately, censorship. (Google Spain SL and Google Inc. v Agencia Española de Protección de Datos (AEPD) and Mario Costeja González, Case C-131/12, 13 May 2014.)

© 2014 Thomson Reuters. All rights reserved