Rest of World: Argentina’s Supreme Court backs Google, says “right to be forgotten” can infringe on freedom of information

Rest of World: Argentina’s Supreme Court backs Google, says “right to be forgotten” can infringe on freedom of information. “The Argentine Supreme Court denied celebrity Natalia Denegri’s petition to have content about a scandal she was involved in more than 25 years ago removed from search engines on Tuesday. It is the first ruling by a Supreme Court in Latin America on the ‘right to be forgotten,’ which allows the public to control their online history.”

Courthouse News Service: European rights court grapples with ‘right to be forgotten’

Courthouse News Service: European rights court grapples with ‘right to be forgotten’. “In 2021, the European Court of Human Rights upheld a ruling by a Belgian court which ordered the newspaper to remove the name of a man who killed two people in a car crash in 1994. Le Soir publisher Patrick Hurbain has been fighting the order for years, making a final appeal before the Strasbourg-based rights court’s Grand Chamber on Wednesday. The case has pitted privacy advocates against media defenders in a legal battle that has lasted more than a decade. Following a 2012 complaint by the driver who caused the car accident, the Belgian high court ordered the country’s top French-language newspaper to anonymize its online archive.”

The Irish News: Irish News among media organisations to have articles pulled by Google ‘at request of Sean Quinn family’

The Irish News: Irish News among media organisations to have articles pulled by Google ‘at request of Sean Quinn family’. “DOZENS of newspaper articles – including Irish News coverage – about ex-billionaire Seán Quinn and his family have been `delisted’ by search engine Google. The removal of articles – including court coverage of how his adult children “used the Quinn Group as ‘their personal bank’ (removing) €1.95 billion” and a lavish wedding with a €100,000 cake – were deleted by the web giant for the family under the EU’s ‘right to be forgotten’ law.”

Into Oblivion: How news outlets are handling the right to be forgotten (Columbia Journalism Review)

Columbia Journalism Review: Into Oblivion: How news outlets are handling the right to be forgotten. “Technically speaking, the ‘right to be forgotten’ does not exist. In EU law, it is encoded as a Right to Erasure, affording individuals the prerogative to request that publishers delete or de-index their data from the internet, provided that the information is no longer relevant or in the public interest.”

European Data Protection Board: The Swedish Data Protection Authority imposes administrative fine on Google

European Data Protection Board: The Swedish Data Protection Authority imposes administrative fine on Google. “The Swedish Data Protection Authority imposes a fine of 75 million Swedish kronor (approximately 7 million euro) on Google for failure to comply with the GDPR. Google as a search engine operator has not fulfilled its obligations in respect of the right to request delisting.” 7 million euro is roughly $7.8 million USD.

Japan Times: Spanish ruling on ‘right to be forgotten’ says Google must put man’s acquittal at top of search results

Japan Times: Spanish ruling on ‘right to be forgotten’ says Google must put man’s acquittal at top of search results. “A Spanish court has partially accepted Google’s appeal against a ruling that ordered it to erase news articles about a man accused of sexual abuse, but the new judgement said the company had to display the man’s acquittal at the top of any search results.”

The ChronicleHerald: Federal Court sidesteps constitutional questions — for now — in Google ‘right to be forgotten’ case

The ChronicleHerald: Federal Court sidesteps constitutional questions — for now — in Google ‘right to be forgotten’ case. “Google LLC was handed a setback this month in a case over the so-called ‘right to be forgotten’ when a Federal Court adjudicator ruled that it won’t delve into the thorny constitutional questions wrapped up in the matter. Instead, the Federal Court will judge two specific points related to Canada’s privacy law, in a reference case brought forward by federal privacy commissioner Daniel Therrien.”