At The Atlantic, Matt Ford writes Will Europe Censor This Article?
|The court's decision comes by appeal of Mario Costeja González, a Spanish man who sought to remove evidence of his home's repossession and auction from the Internet. González argued that the 1998 auction notice in the Spanish newspaper La Vanguardia should no longer be linked to his name in Internet searches. Relying upon the EU's data-protection directive—a regulation governing personal data privacy—and the EU's Charter of Fundamental Rights, the judges ruled that González's privacy rights override "not only the economic interest" of Google as a search engine, "but also the interest of the general public in having access to that information upon a search relating to [González’s] name." As a result, they ordered the links stricken from Google's search results.
"As far as I know, this is unprecedented," Jimmy Wales, a founder of Wikipedia who has campaigned against Internet censorship, told me. "It is certainly shocking to have come from the EU rather than from an authoritarian state."
The ECJ ruling didn't order the newspaper itself, La Vanguardia, to remove its original article, as González had also requested. Instead, the court simply ordered Google to remove all links to the auction notice from its search engine. Ironically, the ECJ's ruling explicitly mentions González's auction notice and financial trouble. Will the court order that its own decision be made unsearchable online?
The court recognized what some European legislators call "the right to be forgotten"—the idea of giving ordinary citizens more control over their personal data, including its deletion. Its ruling sets a precedent for both national courts and the ECJ itself in future cases. "If an individual no longer wants his personal data to be processed or stored by a data controller, and if there is no legitimate reason for keeping it, the data should be removed from their system," stated Viviane Reding, the European Commissioner for Justice, when describing the proposed right in 2012. A European Commission memonoted that the right "is about empowering individuals, not about erasing past events or restricting freedom of the press."
Legally obscuring a person's past isn't an entirely new concept. [...]
Blast from the Past. At Daily Kos on this date in 2006—Billmon: Surveillance Polls Don't Matter:
|Billmon gets "a little crazy in the head" as he contemplates the arguments over whether two-thirds, or one-half, or one-fourth of Americans support being spied upon for their own alleged well-being.
On today's Kagro in the Morning show, Greg Dworkin rounds up the collapse of 3 major Gop narratives: climate change, voter fraud & ACA repeal. Why are Republicans cut off on all paths by facts? Aversion to science carries a high price. Sandy Hook truthers still bonkers. Don't kiss your camel (not a euphemism). Grayson for Bonkersghazi committee? An excerpt from Greenwald's new book makes the national security state sound like cartoon super villains. Rand Paul on drone policy: principled or opportunistic? Or some of both? Snapchat's central premise of turns out not to be true. What happened to our being saved by libertarian tech bros?