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.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Consumer Dispute resolution under the Telecom Act 2023

-
Image
The Telecommunications Act of 2023 has strengthened the dispute resolution framework by introducing an online grievance redressal system. The aim is to expedite the resolution of conflicts between telecommunications companies and consumers while ensuring transparency in the redressal process. Following an inquiry, a telecom company found violating license or service terms may incur severe penalties, spectrum holdings cancellation, service restrictions, or even be prohibited from providing telecom services, depending on the seriousness of the breach.  How does the online grievance redressal system operate, and who plays key roles?   An Adjudicating Officer (AO), appointed by the Centre and not below the rank of joint secretary, will conduct inquiries to resolve disputes between telecom service providers and consumers. Additionally, a separate Designated Appeals Committee (DAC) will be formed, consisting of officers at the rank of additional secretaries. Individuals dissatisfie...
Read more

Types of Cyber Attacks

-
Image
Types of Cyber Attacks There are several effective methods for disrupting computer systems. We are talking of a method known as cyber attack, or computer network attack , which uses malicious computer code to disrupt computer processing, or steal data.  A brief description of three different methods are shown here. However, as technology changes, future distinctions between these methods may begin to blur. An attack against computers may be targeted or un-targeted (i) disrupt equipment and hardware reliability, (ii) change processing logic, or (iii) steal or corrupt data. The methods discussed here are chosen based on the technology asset against which each attack mode is directed, and the effects each method can produce. The assets affected or effects produced can sometimes overlap for different attack methods.  Conventional kinetic weapons can be directed against computer equipment, a computer facility, or transmission lines to create a physical attack that ...
Read more

What to do when police does not take your FIR?

-
Image
What to do when FIR is not taken by the Police ? A First Information Report is the first legal document that initiates criminal proceedings. The first information received about the commission of a cognizable offense has to be noted down by a Police Officer. It is called as  First Information Report under Section 154 of CRPC. Cognizable and Non-Cognizable Offences: Cognizable offences  are offences where the police can arrest the accused without any warrant. In such offences, the police can Suo-moto take cognizance of the offence and it does not require any sanction from the court in order to begin the investigation. On the other hand,  Non-Cognizable  offences are those in which police cannot make an arrest without taking prior assent from the court. Schedule I of the Criminal Procedure Code clearly distinguishes which offenses are cognizable and which are not. According to section 154(1) of the Criminal Procedural Code,  an FIR can be filed only in cognizable ...
Read more