Bloomberg Quint: Google Clash Over Global Right to Be Forgotten Returns to Court

Bloomberg Quint: Google Clash Over Global Right to Be Forgotten Returns to Court. “Google’s battle against French proponents of a worldwide ‘right to be forgotten’ enters a decisive phase at the European Union’s top court on Thursday, in a case that highlights the growing tensions between privacy, freedom of speech and state censorship. Ahead of a ruling later this year, an adviser at the EU Court of Justice will on Jan. 10 deliver an opinion on whether the world’s most-used search engine can limit the geographical scope of the privacy right to EU-based searches.”

Times of Malta: 86 court judgments removed from public database since 2013

Times of Malta: 86 court judgments removed from public database since 2013. “Eighty-six judgments have been removed from the court’s online public database since 2013, it has emerged. The Times of Malta had reported earlier this year that since taking up office in 2013, Justice Minister Owen Bonnici had privately made the decision to introduce ‘the right to be forgotten’ and which discovered by coincidence during an investigation.”

Indivigital: New GDPR Tool Targets Google, Facebook With ‘Automated’ Right To Be Forgotten Requests

Indivigital: New GDPR Tool Targets Google, Facebook With ‘Automated’ Right To Be Forgotten Requests. “…some of the newest GDPR tools have inverted the target market and are helping users partly automate the process of sending erasure requests, colloquially referred to as ‘the right to be forgotten,’ to organizations that store their data. One such tool… allows users to search a database of 5,000 organizations for appropriate contact details of personnel or departments responsible for erasure requests. Upon selecting an organization to contact, the tool also opens a user’s email client and populates a new message with a template email.”

BetaNews: Google loses big ‘right to be forgotten’ case — and it could set an important precedent

BetaNews: Google loses big ‘right to be forgotten’ case — and it could set an important precedent. “A businessman with an historic criminal conviction has won his case against Google in a ‘right to be forgotten’ lawsuit seeking to remove information about his conviction from search results. The case, heard today in London, could set a precedent and lead to a series of similar cases from other people with spent convictions. The anonymous businessman — known only as NT2 — has a conviction for conspiracy to intercept communications from more than a decade ago and spent six months in prison for the crime.”

NPR: The Paris Lawyer Who Gives Google Nightmares

NPR: The Paris Lawyer Who Gives Google Nightmares. “Dan Shefet is an unlikely tech revolutionary. He’s not a young math geek who builds driverless cars, nor does he promise to make a tech product for the masses. His crusade is different. The 63-year-old year old Shefet has staged an astonishingly effective campaign in Europe to thwart the torrent of fake news and damaging personal attacks that course through the Internet by taking on the tech giants.”

The Register: Google lobbies hard to derail new US privacy laws – using dodgy stats

The Register: Google lobbies hard to derail new US privacy laws – using dodgy stats. “As blowback against Facebook and its business model enters its third week, with netizens railing against the amount and type of personal data the social network has on them, calls for new privacy laws have started growing. And in response so has a secret lobbying effort, spearheaded by Google, to head those calls off at the pass.”

Malta Independent: IT Law Association extremely concerned over court judgements being deleted from online database

Malta Independent: IT Law Association extremely concerned over court judgements being deleted from online database. “The Malta IT Law Association (MITLA) has said that it is ‘extremely concerned’ about recent reports that private individuals have successfully requested that court cases decided against them be deleted from online court databases, ‘without having in place clear rules as to how the right to be forgotten is being exercised with respect to public registers.'”