A slightly different take on this question… “The Right to Remember…

 

http://gurstein.wordpress.com/2014/07/05/the-right-to-remember-a-speculative-community-informatics-approach-to-the-right-to-be-forgotten/

 

http://tinyurl.com/ny32god

 

M

 

From: [email protected] 
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Michel Bauwens
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2014 5:10 PM
To: p2p-foundation
Subject: [P2P-F] Fwd: [opennetcoalition] The Right to be Forgotten: Don't 
Forget the Rule of Law!

 

 

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: La Quadrature du Net <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 7:30 PM
Subject: [opennetcoalition] The Right to be Forgotten: Don't Forget the Rule of 
Law!
To: [email protected]


Themes: RIGHT TO BE FORGOTTEN, GOOGLE, DAPIX, PERSONAL DATA, PRIVACY, FREEDOM 
OF EXPRESSION, CENSORSHIP, ECJ

La Quadrature du Net – For immediate release

Permanent link: 
https://www.laquadrature.net/en/the-right-to-be-forgotten-dont-forget-the-rule-of-law


The Right to be Forgotten: Don't Forget the Rule of Law!



*** Paris, 10 July 2014 — On 10 July, the Working Group on Information Exchange 
and Data Protection [1] (DAPIX), in charge of the General Data Protection 
Regulation, worked on the regulation's Article 17, the “Right to be forgotten 
and erasure”. In this framework, the legislator must consider the harm to 
freedom of expression and information, harm which the law currently makes 
possible, and provide citizens with procedures that safeguard that freedom. ***

The work of DAPIX – which is not made accessible to the public – comes after 
the 13 May 2014 judgment [2] by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on a 
dispute between the Spanish Data Protection Agency and Google. This decision 
clearly states that a search engine is required to comply with a person's right 
to object to and erase data when the conditions as laid out by Directive 95/46 
EC are met.

While the court ruling defends the need for data protection, it fails to 
address the issue of finding a balance between the protection of personal data 
and the freedom of expression and information. In effect, the court handed the 
responsibility to find that balance to private search engines although they 
have neither the expertise nor the legitimacy to act as judge, thus clearly 
undermining the rule of law. Indeed, the ruling appeared to ignore the Advocate 
General's [3] warning to preserve the freedom of expression and information. 
Indexation through hypertext links for instance is a way to access and share 
information which is, or should be, protected by freedom of expression.

Google responded promptly to the ECJ ruling, publishing a web form that allows 
Internet users to claim their right to be forgotten, confirming fears of seeing 
the principles of the Rule of Law violated. The US firm received more than 70 
000 [4] requests (1 000 a day on average) and some high-profile media outlets, 
such as The Guardian [5] and the BBC [6], have already been directly affected, 
with articles de-indexed. The case of the BBC is particularly interesting as it 
appeared to concern Mr. Stan O'Neal, the former boss of investment bank Merrill 
Lynch, who is suspected to have made reckless investments that might have led 
to the collapse of the financial giant. The request however, was found to have 
not come from him, but from an Internet user who requested the de-indexation of 
his comment below the article.
This case affects an important aspect of freedom of expression, that is the 
responsible speech, and demonstrates the potential dangers or even abuses posed 
by a badly conceived system that entrusts censorship powers to a private body, 
when that power should be under the sole control of a judicial authority.

The ECJ case law clearly demonstrates that freedom of expression is 
insufficiently protected by the derogation set out in Article 9 of Directive 
95/46 EC and referred to in Article 80 of the proposal of the European 
Commission, under discussion since January 2012. In fact, while current 
European legislation provides for derogation for personal data rights-holders 
for “journalistic purposes”, the European Court of Human Rights handed down 
several judgments that exemplified to what extent “journalistic purposes" are 
not always clearly defined. In the judgment Von Hannover vs. Germany, for 
instance, Princess Caroline of Monaco lost when she opposed the publication of 
a photo taken during family holidays. The court failed to find a violation of 
the right to privacy, not because Caroline of Monaco is a public figure, but 
because the images were accompanied by an article that reported on the Prince 
Rainier's uncertain health status, information considered of general interest.

The ECJ judgment and the abuses already observed in the implementation of the 
right to be forgotten show that the balance between the protection of personal 
data and the freedom of expression and information deserves the greatest 
attention from the legislator. First of all, those shortcomings show that 
exceptions to the protection of personal data provided for freedom of 
expression have proven to be insufficient. Moreover, they show to what extent 
the weighing of those rights require the consideration of multiple elements 
that need to be processed in the framework of a fair trial and which can never 
be subject to an extra-judicial and consequently arbitrary decision.
Finally and more generally, they pose the challenge of determining if the 
legislation on the protection of personal data constitutes the most suitable 
vehicle for the implementation of the right to be forgotten, when the 
information targeted has been disclosed to the public and falls within the 
scope of freedom of expression.

“It is unacceptable that EU law allows extra-judicial censorship. Only a fair 
trial can ensure that an appropriate balance of rights and interests of each 
and every individual is reached. The judicial system, as the public guardian of 
our freedoms, is the only entity capable of finding the right balance between 
privacy and freedom of expression and information. It is essential that 
citizens can, at soon as possible, assert their claims before the court” said 
Jean Cattan, member of La Quadrature du Net's Strategic Policy Committee.

“In order to reaffirm the balance between the right to data protection and 
freedom of expression and information, we call upon the Council to take into 
account the need to create a legal framework not only on data protection, but 
also on freedom of expression and information. This matter can not be addressed 
individually by the every single Member States: it requires a coordinated and 
holistic approach to stop the anti-democratic abuses that unfortunately already 
exist in some EU countries” concluded Miriam Artino in charge of the legal and 
policy analysis at La Quadrature du Net.





* References *

1. http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN 
<http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=ENTRY&i=ADV&DOC_ID=ST%2011289%202014%20INIT>
 &typ=ENTRY&i=ADV&DOC_ID=ST%2011289%202014%20INIT

2. http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document_print.jsf?doclang=EN 
<http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document_print.jsf?doclang=EN&text=&pageIndex=0&part=1&mode=lst&docid=152065&occ=first&dir=&cid=411047>
 &text=&pageIndex=0&part=1&mode=lst&docid=152065&occ=first&dir=&cid=411047

3. http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?docid=138782 
<http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?docid=138782&;> &

4. 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/10955089/There-is-no-such-thing-as-Googles-right-to-be-forgotten-minister-to-say.html

5. 
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/02/eu-right-to-be-forgotten-guardian-google

6. http://www.bbc.com/news/business-28130581






** About La Quadrature du Net **


La Quadrature du Net is an advocacy group that defends the rights and freedoms 
of citizens on the Internet. More specifically, it advocates for the adaptation 
of French and European legislations to respect the founding principles of the 
Internet, most notably the free circulation of knowledge.

In addition to its advocacy work, the group also aims to foster a better 
understanding of legislative processes among citizens. Through specific and 
pertinent information and tools, La Quadrature du Net hopes to encourage 
citizens' participation in the public debate on rights and freedoms in the 
digital age.

La Quadrature du Net is supported by French, European and international NGOs 
including the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Open Society Institute and 
Privacy International.

List of supporting organisations: 
https://www.laquadrature.net/en/they-support-la-quadrature-du-net




** Press contact and press room **

[email protected], +33 (0) 972 294 426

https://www.laquadrature.net/en/press-room




_______________________________________________
Opennetcoalition mailing list
[email protected]
https://laquadrature.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opennetcoalition





 

-- 

Please note an intrusion wiped out my inbox on February 8; I have no record of 
previous communication, proposals, etc ..

 

P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net 

Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

#82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/ 

_______________________________________________
P2P Foundation - Mailing list
http://www.p2pfoundation.net
https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation

Reply via email to