EU court rules in Google's favour: 'right to be forgotten' vetoed
Adviser says search giant should follow law but is not responsible for deleting weblinks
And adviser to EU’s highest court has made a statement stating that that Google does not have to remove personal information from its search results, even that information is damaging to an individual’s reputation.
The statement, delivered by advocate general Niilo Jääskinen is a blow against the long-running argument over the “right to be forgotten” in Europe. Although the court is not bound by Jääskinen’s opinion, in the majority of cases judges follow such recommendations.
"Requesting search engine service providers to suppress legitimate and legal information that has entered the public domain would entail an interference with the freedom of expression,” said Mr Jääskinen in a statement delivered on behalf of the court.
“Search engine service providers are not responsible, on the basis of the data protection directive, for personal data appearing on web pages they process,"
The case stemmed from the complaint of a Spanish man who, after his home was repossessed, found that an auction of his property could be found by Google. The man asked for this information to be deleted and Spain’s courts upheld the complaint.
This case was then referred to the European court of Justice in March 2012, after Google challenged the decision. It is one of 180 similar Spanish cases which are pending the court’s decision, not due before the end of 2013.
In an emailed statement Google’s Bill Echikson said that “This is a good opinion for free expression. We're glad to see it supports our long-held view that requiring search engines to suppress 'legitimate and legal information' would amount to censorship.”
Google have previously argued that there are "clear societal reasons why this kind of information should be publicly available” and, in an interview with the Financial Times, said that any restrictions would “really hurt innovation.”
The court’s decision is based on a reading of the current Data Protection Directive, which controls how personal data appears on websites and whether companies like Google count as publishers or simply hosts.
Jääskinen judged that under current law Google cannot be considered a ‘controller’ of personal data and therefore has no responsibility to remove information, unless it is false, libellous or criminal.
- 1 What happens to your body when you give up sugar?
- 2 Have sex with your iPad thanks to the new sex toy no-one asked for
- 3 The 'sex selfie stick' lets you FaceTime the inside of a vagina
- 4 Why you're almost certainly more like your father than your mother
- 5 Westboro Baptist Church couldn't picket Leonard Nimoy's funeral because they didn't know where it was
Mark Zuckerberg: Facebook CEO's one simple test for who to hire
Bali nine: Welcome to 'Execution Island' – the Indonesian holiday resort where foreigners are sent to die
'A girl is more responsible for rape than a boy': The statement that shocked the world... except India
The 'sex selfie stick' lets you FaceTime the inside of a vagina
Saudi Arabia executions now at 'unprecedented rate' after kingdom kills four more in two days
Durham Free School: 'Creationism taught at' free school facing closure
Nearly 100,000 of Britain's poorest children go hungry after parents' benefits are cut
End of the licence fee: BBC to back radical overhaul of how it is funded
Nigel Farage promises Ukip will not 'stigmatise' would-be migrants – and says he wants 'everyone to speak the same language'
Ex-head of MI6: 'We shouldn't kid ourselves that Russia is on a path to democracy'
Most people think legal tax avoidance is just as wrong as illegal tax evasion, poll suggests
£16000 - £18000 per annum: Recruitment Genius: They are an award-winning digit...
£45000 - £55000 per annum + benefits: Ashdown Group: Senior VMware Platform En...
£10000 - £16000 per annum: Recruitment Genius: A distributor of specialist ele...
£17000 - £19000 per annum: Recruitment Genius: A distributor of specialist ele...