Court in EU Backs 'Right to be Forgotten on Google"

Court in EU Backs 'Right to be Forgotten'

European Union Internet users now can ask Google and other search engines to remove certain sensitive information from Internet search results, Europe's highest court ruled on May 13,2014.

The ruling, handed down by the Court of Justice of the European Union, states the "operator of the search engine ... is, in certain circumstances, obliged to remove links to Web pages that are published by third parties and contain information relating to a person from the list of results displayed following a search made on the basis of that person's name."

The court's ruling on the "right to be forgotten" stems from a case involving a man in Spain who argued that Google's search results disclosed details about the auction of his repossessed home over unpaid debts. "[The man] stated that the proceedings concerning him had been fully resolved for a number of years and that reference to them was now entirely irrelevant," the ruling states.

Google, in a statement provided to Information Security Media Group, said: "This is a disappointing ruling for search engines and online publishers in general. We now need to take time to analyze the implications."

EU Justice Commissioner Viviane Reding, the European Commission's vice president, said on her Facebook page May 13 that the judgment is a "clear victory" for the protection of Europeans' personal data.

"Companies can no longer hide behind their servers being based in California or anywhere else in the world," she wrote. "Today's judgment is a strong tailwind for the data protection reform that the European Commission proposed in January 2012 as it confirms the main pillars of what we have inscribed in the data protection regulation. The ruling confirms the need to bring today's data protection rules from the 'digital stone age' into today's modern computing world."

The Implications

This judgement should make it easier for individuals who seek the removal or blocking of links to information that they find offensive, irrelevant or obsolete to obtain redress if the search engine ignores their request.This is finding a balance between the public's right to have access to any information that has been legally published, and the individual's right to obtain the blocking of data that might be inadequate, not relevant or no longer relevant, or excessive in relation to the purpose for which they were processed, and in the light of the time that has passed.

The ruling changes the risk landscape for not only services that are publishing information as first-party original content, but any service that aggregates data from other websites, such as Facebook, Twitter and search engines, This is an incredibly significant decision for all of them.

In India some one has to file a writ in any Courts of jurisdiction and get the same judgement passed here.