The British Parliament opposed the "right to be forgotten"
Adopted in may the decision of the European court "right to be forgotten" — the right to be forgotten — the right of users to demand removal of information from search engines about themselves — continues to cause lively discussions. This time on the side of the defenders of freedom of information rose by English lords: Committee of internal Affairs, health and education of the chamber of peers, the upper house of the British Parliament, criticized the decision, pichet the Guardian newspaper.
The lords believe that search engines should not be held responsible for the content of search results. They note that the data protection Directive of the European Union of 1995, relied on the European court, in its decision, was designed three years before the advent of Google — and after nearly 20 years does not reflect what happened since then changes.
The parliamentarians point to two reasons why a decision would be unworkable in practice:
first, it does not take into account small search engines that do not have the resources to handle thousands of incoming demands to remove search results.
second, a wrong idea to allow commercial companies to censor content based on vague, ambiguous or useless criteria.
They call for the creation of new rules, which the search engines will no longer be perceived as control data, that allow to remove from them the responsibility for the result.
Let me remind you that the decision was taken in may in response to the Spanish claim of the user. Since then, Google has received more than 70 thousand user requests to remove yourself from search results. In response, the company
Article based on information from habrahabr.ru
The lords believe that search engines should not be held responsible for the content of search results. They note that the data protection Directive of the European Union of 1995, relied on the European court, in its decision, was designed three years before the advent of Google — and after nearly 20 years does not reflect what happened since then changes.
The parliamentarians point to two reasons why a decision would be unworkable in practice:
first, it does not take into account small search engines that do not have the resources to handle thousands of incoming demands to remove search results.
second, a wrong idea to allow commercial companies to censor content based on vague, ambiguous or useless criteria.
They call for the creation of new rules, which the search engines will no longer be perceived as control data, that allow to remove from them the responsibility for the result.
Let me remind you that the decision was taken in may in response to the Spanish claim of the user. Since then, Google has received more than 70 thousand user requests to remove yourself from search results. In response, the company
Комментарии
Отправить комментарий