[Chapter-delegates] [European-chapters] ECJ: Internet searchengine's data processing responsibilities
Veni Markovski
veni at veni.com
Mon May 19 06:25:13 PDT 2014
Richard,
This sounds strange.
The information will still be there. If someone wants to access it, they
will be able to. If it was true towards certain date, but is not true
any longer, then this should be somehow mentioned.
Let's get out of the digital world for a moment, and go back to paper.
If a newspaper publishes an article, which is wrong or misleading, it
publishes a correction (at some point). There's no way to remove the old
article, or to take away the correction, in which the original date and
artile, and errors are mentioned. And if someone remembers that there
was such a publication, he or she could serve as a "search engine". What
will you tell the person in charge at the paper articles, "Don't tell
anyone there is such an article"? Or "Tell them there is such an
article, and correction after that".
v.
On 05/19/14 09:19, Richard Hill wrote:
> As I understand it, the ruling establishes a principle that will apply
> to all search engines.
> The information in question was correct at the time it was published
> (an updaid debt) but was no longer correct, because the debt had been
> paid. The Spanish court ruled that there was no cause to order the
> removal of the original information, because it was correct at the
> date of publication. The ECJ ruled that it was legitimate for the
> user to request that the link to that old, and no loger relevant,
> information be removed when people searched Google using his name as
> the search criterion.
>
> Best,
> Richard
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* Chapter-delegates
> [mailto:chapter-delegates-bounces at elists.isoc.org]*On Behalf Of
> *John More
> *Sent:* lundi, 19. mai 2014 15:15
> *To:* Markovski Veni
> *Cc:* Delegates Chapter; Pablo García Mexía; Privacy list; Elist
> publicpolicy; European Chapters
> *Subject:* Re: [Chapter-delegates] [European-chapters] ECJ:
> Internet searchengine's data processing responsibilities
>
> Veni
>
> To be clear — I support removal of links to all sorts of
> defamatory, sexually harassing, etc. Information, but that is not
> this case. This allows anyone who does not like a true information
> to have links removed, even though the source is not one that has
> to be removed.
>
> And, as you say, Google may be the target, but what about all the
> other search engines, including smaller dedicated ones. Better to
> regulate the misuse of information, such as by employers or health
> insurance companies.
>
> John More
>
> On May 19, 2014, at 9:01 AM, Veni Markovski <veni at veni.com
> <mailto:veni at veni.com>> wrote:
>
>> John,
>> I understand the case against Google, but what about the other
>> search engines? And what about the fact that the information will
>> still exist somewhere, regardless of whether Google will "forget
>> it" or not?
>>
>> v.
>>
>> On 05/19/14 08:49, John More wrote:
>>> As a lawyer who generally dislikes litigation, I concur fully
>>> with Vint’s statement. The ECJ’s decision is poorly conceived
>>> and drafted and can only result in expensive litigation
>>> burdening the providers of search services (and therefore the
>>> public).
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>> On May 19, 2014, at 8:37 AM, Vint Cerf <vint at google.com
>>> <mailto:vint at google.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> richard,
>>>> litigation is EXPENSIVE. Google is being forced to make a
>>>> judgment based not on its own standards but on an uncertain
>>>> "standard" that is not clear in the opinion expressed by ECJ.
>>>> This is not a good outcome. You trivialize the problem in my
>>>> opinion.
>>>>
>>>> vint
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 8:02 AM, Richard Hill <rhill at hill-a.ch
>>>> <mailto:rhill at hill-a.ch>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Dear Pablo,
>>>> Perhaps I misunderstood the ECJ judgement, but it seems to
>>>> me that it does not impose any obligation on Google to
>>>> adjudicate privacy or to substitute itself for a judge. As
>>>> I understand it, the ECJ says that a private person can
>>>> request that certain links be removed. If the search
>>>> provider refuses, then the private person can ask his
>>>> national authorities (data protection officer or courts, as
>>>> the case may be) to evaluate his request and, if it is
>>>> justified, to order the search provider to remove the link.
>>>> Best,
>>>> Richard
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> *From:* Chapter-delegates
>>>> [mailto:chapter-delegates-bounces at elists.isoc.org
>>>> <mailto:chapter-delegates-bounces at elists.isoc.org>]*On
>>>> Behalf Of *Pablo García Mexía
>>>> *Sent:* lundi, 19. mai 2014 11:35
>>>> *To:* Frédéric Donck
>>>> *Cc:* Delegates Chapter; European Chapters; Privacy
>>>> list; Elist publicpolicy
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Chapter-delegates] [European-chapters]
>>>> ECJ: Internet searchengine's data processing
>>>> responsibilities
>>>>
>>>> Just wrote an article on my blog on Spanish
>>>> newspaper ABC.es <http://abc.es/> concerning this
>>>> crucial ruling: http://abcblogs.abc.es/ley-red/
>>>> [In Spanish, sorry!!]
>>>> Google does searches; the ECJ will have it adjudicate
>>>> on "privacy" from now on. And yet, how can Google
>>>> substitute to a judge on issues as relevant and touchy
>>>> as these?
>>>> Best wishes.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Frédéric Donck
>>>> <donck at isoc.org <mailto:donck at isoc.org>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Dear All
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please find below a very important decision from
>>>> the European Court of Justice.
>>>> In short, in itsruling
>>>> <http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2014-05/cp140070en.pdf>from
>>>> 13 May [Google vs Spanish Data Protection Agency
>>>> (AEPD)], the Court of Justice of the European Union
>>>> stated that an operator of Internet search engine
>>>> is responsible for the processing that it carries
>>>> out of personal data which appear on web pages
>>>> published by third parties. More details in the
>>>> attach. I would be interested to hear your views.
>>>>
>>>> We shall address it in our next EU newsletter but
>>>> felt that the information deserved immediate
>>>> distribution.
>>>> Best Regards
>>>> Frederic
>>>>
>>>> Frederic Donck
>>>> Director European Regional Bureau
>>>> Internet Society
>>>>
>>>> www.isoc.org <http://www.isoc.org/>
>>>>
>>>> Début du message réexpédié :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer of the European
>>>> region you are automatically subscribed to this list,
>>>> which is regularly synchronized with the Internet
>>>> Society Chapter Portal (AMS):
>>>> https://portal.isoc.org <https://portal.isoc.org/>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Pablo García Mexía, J.D., Ph.D.
>>>> Profesor visitante de Derecho de Internet
>>>> The College of William & Mary
>>>>
>>>> Sigue mi columna semanal en ABC.es <http://abc.es/>
>>>> http://abcblogs.abc.es/ley-red/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are
>>>> automatically subscribed
>>>> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the
>>>> Internet Society
>>>> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
>>>> <https://portal.isoc.org/>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically
>>>> subscribed
>>>> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet
>>>> Society
>>>> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
>>>> <https://portal.isoc.org/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
>>> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
>>> Chapter Portal (AMS):https://portal.isoc.org
>>
>> --
>>
>> Best,
>> Veni Markovski
>> http://www.veni.com
>> https://www.facebook.com/venimarkovski
>> https://twitter.com/veni
>>
>> The opinions expressed above are those of the
>> author, not of any organizations, associated
>> with or related to him in any given way.
>
--
Best,
Veni Markovski
http://www.veni.com
https://www.facebook.com/venimarkovski
https://twitter.com/veni
The opinions expressed above are those of the
author, not of any organizations, associated
with or related to him in any given way.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20140519/ef231e92/attachment.htm>
More information about the Chapter-delegates
mailing list