France demands to make the "right to oblivion" global - on what it can be affected by
The French organization CNIL , dealing with the protection of personal data in the country, demanded that Google extend the "right to oblivion" to the whole world. The regulator wants the links removed from the French version to be hidden in versions of Google for other countries.
IT giant did not agree with this requirement, because the dispute between Google and CNIL went to the hall of the Court of Justice of the European Union. Next, we understand the essence of the conflict.
/photo Mounirzok CC
Right to oblivion is active. in the EU since 2014. EU citizens can send a request to Google with a request to hide specific information from the SERP. The law allows you to hide incomplete, irrelevant or knowingly false data about a person.
Entered in May this year by virtue of the GDPR has expanded understanding rights to oblivion. Now EU citizens can request to remove links from the SERP if:
they object to their treatment;
this information was obtained without their consent;
permission to process personal data was withdrawn.
The precedent for taking the right to oblivion was litigation in 200? when a certain Mario Gonzalez (Mario González) found , that the Google search engine on the request on his behalf issues court notices of twenty years ago, published by the Spanish newspaper. The trial lasted five years, but then the court nevertheless took the side of Gonzalez.
Google each request considers individually. In total, in the period from 2014 (since the adoption of the law) through 201? the company received 2.5 million requests for information removal, with 89% of applications received from individuals, and not from public persons.
In 201? CNIL demanded that Google remove links under the law on the right to oblivion, not only for European versions of the search engine, but for the whole world. As a half-measure, the IT giant proposed to hide links in all domains when searching from French IP addresses.
CNIL this solution seemed insufficient: the national commission ordered Google to remove the search results for countries outside the European Union. The American company did not agree with this requirement and received a fine of 100 thousand euros.
After that, Google filed a lawsuit against CNIL in the French State Council. The Council found it difficult to answer the case, since it concerns the international European law. Therefore, claim crossed in the highest judicial body of the EU - the Court of the European Union.
The meeting was over on September 11. It is expected that the solution will be in the beginning of 2019.
/photo Katarina Dzurekova CC
CNIL insists , that her claim to Google can not be considered an attempt to apply French laws outside the country. Representatives of the organization say that they only require "the observance of European laws by non-European companies offering their services to the EU."
CNIL notes that for the "full" execution of the right to oblivion, it is necessary to delete data from the results of issuance for all countries. Otherwise, EU citizens will still be able to access them if they use VPN services.
The company believes that European regulators should not define the "look and feel" and content of websites for users around the world. The IT giant in this matter is supported by the human rights organization Article 1? which deals with issues of free access to information.
Former general counsel of Google Daphne Keller (Daphne Keller) says , that this case can cause the governments of other countries to influence the content of Internet platforms for the whole world. If the precedent is fixed, then it is not known how long it will take before other states make such demands. Potentially, this approach can negatively affect the freedom of speech on the Web.
The Committee of Reporters for Freedom of the Press (RCFP) agreed with this opinion. Organization noted , that such application of the concept of the right to oblivion is contrary to international law and violates people's freedoms.
As we have already said, the final decision of the court will be known only after a few months. But Daphne Keller said that the likelihood of losing to Google is quite high. Earlier, the lawyer participated in the search engine against a Canadian company that required Google to remove links to confidential information about its activities for all versions of the site.
The Canadian court ruled that the IT giant must hide the necessary information from the issuance. And although later this case was considered in the US court, which took the opposite decision, it did not affect the initial decision in any way. Daphne believes that a similar situation can occur in the CNIL case.
While it is unclear what will Google do when defeated in court. When the Wall Street Journal tried to get a comment from the company's representatives, they refused to expand on this topic. It is likely that the decision in favor of CNIL will change the mechanisms of interaction between the regulators of countries with online services and will affect the "amount" of content presented on the Internet.
P.S. Additional reading in our blog about IaaS:
How to process PD in the cloud and not violate the law
What counts PD from the point of view of the Russian regulator
PD in the cloud: understand the responsibilities of the customer and the cloud provider
P.P.S. Posts on the topic in our blog on Habré:
Three months later: how GDPR affected the work of cookies
The American analogue of the GDPR: what you need to know about the act CCPA
IT giant did not agree with this requirement, because the dispute between Google and CNIL went to the hall of the Court of Justice of the European Union. Next, we understand the essence of the conflict.
/photo Mounirzok CC
What is the right to oblivion
Right to oblivion is active. in the EU since 2014. EU citizens can send a request to Google with a request to hide specific information from the SERP. The law allows you to hide incomplete, irrelevant or knowingly false data about a person.
Entered in May this year by virtue of the GDPR has expanded understanding rights to oblivion. Now EU citizens can request to remove links from the SERP if:
they object to their treatment;
this information was obtained without their consent;
permission to process personal data was withdrawn.
The precedent for taking the right to oblivion was litigation in 200? when a certain Mario Gonzalez (Mario González) found , that the Google search engine on the request on his behalf issues court notices of twenty years ago, published by the Spanish newspaper. The trial lasted five years, but then the court nevertheless took the side of Gonzalez.
Google each request considers individually. In total, in the period from 2014 (since the adoption of the law) through 201? the company received 2.5 million requests for information removal, with 89% of applications received from individuals, and not from public persons.
Proceedings between Google and CNIL
In 201? CNIL demanded that Google remove links under the law on the right to oblivion, not only for European versions of the search engine, but for the whole world. As a half-measure, the IT giant proposed to hide links in all domains when searching from French IP addresses.
CNIL this solution seemed insufficient: the national commission ordered Google to remove the search results for countries outside the European Union. The American company did not agree with this requirement and received a fine of 100 thousand euros.
After that, Google filed a lawsuit against CNIL in the French State Council. The Council found it difficult to answer the case, since it concerns the international European law. Therefore, claim crossed in the highest judicial body of the EU - the Court of the European Union.
The meeting was over on September 11. It is expected that the solution will be in the beginning of 2019.
/photo Katarina Dzurekova CC
Opinions and arguments of the parties
Viewpoint CNIL
CNIL insists , that her claim to Google can not be considered an attempt to apply French laws outside the country. Representatives of the organization say that they only require "the observance of European laws by non-European companies offering their services to the EU."
CNIL notes that for the "full" execution of the right to oblivion, it is necessary to delete data from the results of issuance for all countries. Otherwise, EU citizens will still be able to access them if they use VPN services.
View Google
The company believes that European regulators should not define the "look and feel" and content of websites for users around the world. The IT giant in this matter is supported by the human rights organization Article 1? which deals with issues of free access to information.
Former general counsel of Google Daphne Keller (Daphne Keller) says , that this case can cause the governments of other countries to influence the content of Internet platforms for the whole world. If the precedent is fixed, then it is not known how long it will take before other states make such demands. Potentially, this approach can negatively affect the freedom of speech on the Web.
The Committee of Reporters for Freedom of the Press (RCFP) agreed with this opinion. Organization noted , that such application of the concept of the right to oblivion is contrary to international law and violates people's freedoms.
Probable outcome is
As we have already said, the final decision of the court will be known only after a few months. But Daphne Keller said that the likelihood of losing to Google is quite high. Earlier, the lawyer participated in the search engine against a Canadian company that required Google to remove links to confidential information about its activities for all versions of the site.
The Canadian court ruled that the IT giant must hide the necessary information from the issuance. And although later this case was considered in the US court, which took the opposite decision, it did not affect the initial decision in any way. Daphne believes that a similar situation can occur in the CNIL case.
While it is unclear what will Google do when defeated in court. When the Wall Street Journal tried to get a comment from the company's representatives, they refused to expand on this topic. It is likely that the decision in favor of CNIL will change the mechanisms of interaction between the regulators of countries with online services and will affect the "amount" of content presented on the Internet.
P.S. Additional reading in our blog about IaaS:
How to process PD in the cloud and not violate the law
What counts PD from the point of view of the Russian regulator
PD in the cloud: understand the responsibilities of the customer and the cloud provider
P.P.S. Posts on the topic in our blog on Habré:
Three months later: how GDPR affected the work of cookies
The American analogue of the GDPR: what you need to know about the act CCPA
