Google decides that search results must be deleted if they are 'inaccurate', to extend 'forgotten rights'
On December 8, 2022, the European Court of Justice, which is equivalent to the Supreme Court in the European Union, requested Google to delete search results about me if the information was proved to be ``clearly inaccurate'' in the EU. I have decided that I can. It is reported that this will increase the number of cases where the '
Right to erasure ('right to be forgotten'): the operator of a search engine must dereference information found in the referenced content where the person requesting dereferencing proves that such information is manifestly inaccurate
(PDF file) https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2022-12/cp220197en.pdf
Google must delete search results about you if they're fake, EU court rules – POLITICO
https://www.politico.eu/article/google-delete-search-result-fake-eu-court-rule/
Google must remove search data if proven inaccurate, EU court says
https://www.siliconrepublic.com/enterprise/google-search-data-eu-gdpr-whatsapp
The ruling was triggered by a lawsuit filed against Google by two executives of an investment group. In this lawsuit, the plaintiffs deleted the link to the article and their thumbnail image from the search results, saying, ``If you search by their name, an article with an inaccurate description of the company's investment law will be displayed.'' I asked Google to On the other hand, Google refused the request, saying, ``We cannot judge whether the information contained in the article is accurate.''
In response to the dispute, the European Court of Justice ruled that 'freedom of expression and freedom ofinformation shall be protected if at least part of the information contained in the referenced content, and not of minor importance, is found to be inaccurate. It will not be considered,” he said, expressing the view that information that proves to be inaccurate is not subject to freedom of expression and information.
On the other hand, for those who request deletion of search results, ``the person who requested to remove the reference must prove that the information is clearly inaccurate.'' was made obligatory. However, in this case, the proof does not have to be rigorous evidence, such as filing a lawsuit against the publisher about the content of the book, but ``evidence that is reasonably required when collecting information'' is sufficient. That's what I'm talking about.
This ruling is positioned to open the door wide for the exercise of the 'right to be forgotten' stipulated in the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Ross McKenzie, partner at law firm Addleshaw Goddard, said: 'The EU is taking an increasingly aggressive approach to holding online service providers more accountable for the information they host. , because sharing false information can have serious consequences for individuals, so service providers should continue their efforts to ensure that the content they provide is monitored.' .
Google also said, ``We welcome this ruling and are currently reviewing the court's ruling.The links and thumbnails that were problematic in this trial are no longer available for search or image search. In addition, the content in question has been offline for a long time.'
The European Court of Justice has made another important decision on privacy. WhatsApp, a messaging app owned by Facebook, was fined 225 million euros (approximately 29 billion yen at the time) by the authorities for ``failing to explain the use of personal information''. judgment regarding.
A fine of 29 billion yen for Facebook's WhatsApp, the EU's pressure jumps the fine more than four times
For WhatsApp, which had appealed against the decision of the authorities, the European Court of Justice dismissed the appeal as `` WhatsApp's claim is not accepted '' ( PDF file) . He pointed out that it is possible to appeal to national courts rather than to the EU.
Related Posts:
in Web Service, Posted by log1l_ks