« Can the Commissioner enforce the correct part of the First Principle, please? | Main | Press and Google misrepresent European Court’s Google judgement »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Not sure I agree. CJEU is quite clear that rights to privacy, as a general rule, override Google's commercial interests and the interests of other internet users (presumably this is getting at freedom of expression). Only in particular cases can the information be retained. Read paras. 80 & 81.

So the ruling is quite clear on the scope of this right. Whether it is enforced is another matter.

Peter C


Paras 80 and 81 fall under the “Question 2(c) and (d), concerning the extent of the responsibility of the operator of a search engine under Directive 95/46”; this relates to the obligation of a controller to apply the national law based on the Directive.

Para 81 says that “a fair balance should be sought in particular between that interest (of freedom of speech) and the data subject’s fundamental rights under Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter”. So I don't interpret this section as being a preference to maintain privacy over freedom of expression at all - its a balance.

In the section on the DPA, I set out the detail of that balance.

And para 81 goes on to say "the data subject's rights protected by [art 7 & 8 of the Charter] also override, as a general rule, that interest of internet users" - i.e. my right to privacy is more important than the rights of others to stalk me on Google.
So technically still a "balancing exercise" but one with heavily weighted scales. Or am I still missing something?

The comments to this entry are closed.

All materials on this website are the copyright of Amberhawk Training Limited, except where otherwise stated. If you want to use the information on the blog, all we ask is that you do so in an attributable manner.