How ‘landmark’ right to be forgotten case will change Google search results
Search giant wins four-year legal battle against tougher privacy laws
The EU’s highest court has ruled that Google does not have to remove links to personal data from its worldwide search results.
The judgment by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) brings to an end a four-year dispute between the search giant and French privacy regulator CNIL, the BBC reports.
In 2015, CNIL ordered Google to remove links to pages containing “damaging or false information about a person” from its global search results under the “right to be forgotten” laws, the broadcaster says.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
Google introduced a “geoblocking” feature the following year, preventing users in Europe from viewing “delisted links”.
But it refused to censor search results for users in other parts of the world and contested a €100,000 (£88,100) fine issued by the French privacy watchdog, says The Verge.
“There is no obligation under EU law, for a search engine operator who grants a request for de-referencing made by a data subject… to carry out such a de-referencing on all the versions of its search engine,” the ECJ’s ruling said.
While the court’s decision means that Google is not under obligation to remove links from global searches that fall under the right to be forgotten laws, the company is still required to censor results for users in Europe.
What is the “right to be forgotten”?
The right to be forgotten was introduced by the ECJ in 2014 as a means of erasing “irrelevant and outdated material” in Europe, The Daily Telegraph explains.
In principle, the rights mean that any “embarrassing or incorrect information” about an individual, such as their “sexual history or criminal convictions”, that is available online can be erased upon request, the newspaper says.
In the case of Google’s dispute with CNIL, the French privacy watchdog said that the “international nature of the internet” could result in a person’s reputation being affected even if their personal information is deleted from search results in their region, the paper adds.
Google, on the other hand, argues that authoritarian governments could abuse right to be forgotten laws if they were policed outside of the European Union, to “cover up human rights abuses”, The Guardian says.
How will the ruling affect Google search results?
The Telegraph claims that the case was a “test” to see if the EU could “extend its laws beyond its borders” and whether a person could remove their personal information from the global web “without stifling free speech”.
With the ruling going in Google’s favour, the company needs to remove links to sensitive information only from European search results after receiving a takedown request from an EU citizen. Therefore, the information would still be visible in search results made by users outside of the EU.
There was a “second ruling”, which stated that tech companies are not “automatically” required to remove links just because they contain information about someone’s sex life or criminal convictions, the BBC says.
The ECJ, however, said that links that do not fall under the right to be forgotten laws, but are classified as containing sensitive information, should “fall down search result listings over time”, the broadcaster adds.
Create an account with the same email registered to your subscription to unlock access.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
-
'A speaker courageous enough to stand up to the extremists in his own party'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By Harold Maass, The Week US Published
-
How could the Supreme Court's Fischer v. US case impact the other Jan 6. trials including Trump's?
Today's Big Question A former Pennsylvania cop might hold the key to a major upheaval in how the courts treat the Capitol riot — and its alleged instigator
By Rafi Schwartz, The Week US Published
-
Today's political cartoons - April 18, 2024
Cartoons Thursday's cartoons - impeachment Peanuts, record-breaking temperatures, and more
By The Week US Published
-
Artificial history
Opinion Google's AI tailored the past to fit modern mores, but only succeeded in erasing real historical crimes
By Theunis Bates Published
-
Is Google's new AI bot 'woke'?
Talking Points Gemini produced images of female popes and Black Vikings. Now the company has stepped back.
By Joel Mathis, The Week US Published
-
Why Google search results have 'gotten worse'
Under The Radar Search engines are 'flooded' with 'garbage' content, say experts
By Chas Newkey-Burden, The Week UK Published
-
2023: the year of the AI boom
the explainer This year, generative artificial intelligence bypassed the metaverse and became the next big thing in tech
By Theara Coleman, The Week US Published
-
Alexa? How much do you know about me?
Smart devices are potentially sharing vast amounts of your personal data with social media and marketing companies
By Richard Windsor Published
-
Is using Google's Enhanced Safe Browsing mode worth it?
Talking Point The mode has its positives and its drawbacks
By Justin Klawans Published
-
Google is pitching an AI journalism tool to major news outlets
Talking Point News executives find the technology called Genesis unsettling
By Theara Coleman Published
-
Forget junk mail. Junk content is the new nuisance, thanks to AI.
Speed Read AI-generative models are driving a surge in content on fake news sites
By Theara Coleman Published