The court did not force the company to remove search links to negative articles about the plaintiffs according to the “right to oblivion”.
The Supreme court rejected the appeals of two plaintiffs to Google and confirmed the lower courts ‘ decision. The case concerned issues of confidentiality, reports DW.
It is noted that in the first case, the former managing Director of the charitable organization has demanded that Google remove links to certain articles that appeared during a search of his name. In articles in 2011, it was reported that the organization had financial problems and the Manager specifically referred to his illness, although was not sick.
He later claimed in court that information about his personal health problems should not disclose to the public through the years.
The court held that the need to remove references to critical articles from the list of search always depends on the comprehensive consideration of fundamental rights in each case.
The second case was referred to the European court. It involved two top managers of the company providing financial services who were trying to remove links to negative reports about their investment models. They argued that the American sites that pop up with their names when the search was full of fake news and sought to bring to the market for other financial services providers.
This is the first ruling of the Supreme court of Germany until 2018 entered into force on joint EU regulation on data protection. It gives EU citizens the broad right to demand from corporations immediate removal of personal data.
In this case links are removed only in Europe but in other regions they will appear as usual. Any information “forgotten” by Google, which mostly contain links to materials published by others, are only removed from the search results, not from the Internet.
“Right to be forgotten” has been the subject of a long legal dispute with Google and the EU. Last year’s decision of the EU Court forced the search engines to comply with requests for removal of search results.
Earlier it was reported, stauropegia the court ordered YouTube to disclose data online pirates.
It was also reported that the court forbade the transfer of data of EU citizens in the US. Limitations on the protection of personal data in the United States do not meet the requirements of EU legislation.
Katrine Johns has been a reporter on the news desk since 2013. Before that she wrote about young adolescence and family dynamics for Styles and was the legal affairs correspondent for the Metro desk. Before joining The Gal Post, Katrine Johns worked as a staff writer at the Village Voice and a freelancer for Newsday, The Wall Street Journal, GQ and Mirabella. To get in touch, contact me through my firstname.lastname@example.org 1-800-268-7128