The story began when the European Union Court decided that data must be preserved for future reference. Under the regulation, all websites and other things online had to keep a copy of data even if it was removed or altered online. Then what is the right to be forgotten, and how does it work in the light of EU data protection law?
Things were fine until someone in Spain filed a case against Spanish Newspaper for showing him in poor light. The fact was that person made a foreclosure of a loan, and years later, this information appeared in the newspaper as a reference (probably in a press release by a third party). The Spanish court handed over the case to the EU court as it felt that such information from the past, which had been fixed long ago, could affect the present and future of people. It also asked to examine the law in light of the Data Protection Law by the same EU court.
EU Court Ruling: Right To Be Forgotten
After brainstorming with Google and Microsoft, the EU court concluded that the data which is no longer needed could be removed – under Data Protection Act. It further concluded that people could opt for images, events, and news to be forgotten after they are of no relevance.
In simple words, the ruling has two main parts:
- Data Protection Act had to include a clause that a piece of information be deleted forever if it is no longer required or if the authorities are sure that the information will not be necessary for legal proceedings in the future.
- The Right to be Forgotten was granted where people can request search engines to remove references to their information that these requesters feel are spoiling their image for no-fault.
The Right to be Forgotten has specific important clauses. First of all, if the search engine removes the information from its servers, the third party hosting the information too has to erase the data from the Internet so that it is not re-indexed by search engines. It also says that search engines operating using servers based out of the EU too need to comply with the decision in which the complainant resides and is a citizen of the European Union.
It further adds that each request to be forgotten has to be reviewed separately. The request to be forgotten has to see if the URLs and/or stories being asked to be removed are not of public importance anymore. If the applicant has had a criminal past, the records cannot be removed as people need to know about the person, even if the person has mended his ways. Likewise, suppose the applicant has had a public life as a celebrity or a politician, and the story being asked to be removed related to that public life. The Data Protection Act will protect it, and the Right to be Forgotten will not apply here.
How To Apply To Be Forgotten
As of now, both Google and Bing are offering special forms. A person willing to remove a piece from Internet has to fill up the form and submit it along with documents (if any are requested).
Removal of material from search engines is not new. There were already provisions to remove personal information etc., from search engines. But with the EU ruling, the matter has to be taken up on a priority basis, and ALSO, the third party hosting the objectionable content has to erase that data from its site(s).
It is better to apply both Bing and Google when you want to be forgotten, as that would ensure you are forgotten. Using the special forms and methods provided and asked by these search engines also facilitates the erasure of third-party websites’ data so that they are not indexed again.
- Google’ Form for Right To Be Forgotten: Click here.
- Bing’s Form for Removal of Content and to be Forgotten: Click here.
NOTE: In both forms, you will have to provide digital identification proof so that they know it is the same person and not some imposter.
Read: How to remove your name and information from Search Engines.
Remember that submitting the forms does not guarantee that the information will be removed. It will be studied by experts who have to decide that the information is indeed useless and not relevant anymore before it goes for deletion with a request to erase the contents on the third-party websites.
Is the UK still part of EU data protection?
As of January 1, 2021, the United Kingdom officially left the European Union. Under the EU’s GDPR, the United Kingdom is now considered to be a “third country.” Because of this, the EU-GDPR is an EU regulation and it no longer applies to the UK.
What is the difference between Data Protection Act and GDPR?
A GDPR law broadens the scope of what the Data Protection Act covers to account for online identification markers, location data, and genetic information, among others
Seems reasonable that in cases where a Court could find libel/inasion of privacy occurred, or the public interest would no longer be served in retaining some internet-based public record, one should be able to get such record “expunged” (or att least corrected).
Cheers to the EU for having such a record; it’s not that way at all in the USA, despite all the clamor over net neutrality, internet privacy, and so forth. For example, my wife bought outright (via mortgage) a house over a year ago in our town in an arms-length transaction; the person she bought it from was a locally licensed real estate appraiser; turns out, he and several of his family (also such appraisers) are using and renewing registrations for their businesses with the Secretary of State even as recently as last month; going to the authority which licenses these people, I have been told my complaint is dismissed as (for reasoning known only to this agency) here appraisers may maintain any records they like relevant to their profession without State concern, even if that means “drafting” false addresses for maintenance of residency or registered agency appearances; the authority’s letter to me this month in fact further concludes although they know the appraisers have improper addresses apparent, and even if we get roughed up from time to time by people seeing our address as only known publicly displayed contacts for these people in State databases, the appraisers will not be disciplined or even be asked to correct such data themselves…at “real” addresses/phones the agency references as existent for licensure with them but won’t release to me or anyone else.
Of course, the Secretary of State, while at least making attempts to contact these appraisers directly without yet known success, still represents it will take some sort of Court order on our part to compel the Secretary to correct such public databases if appraisers won’t comply…you’d think things like administrative dissolution for false filings might apply, but no…not even in the land of uber-spies who must know all our thoughts, regulate abilities to photograph, and have say-so detention/”intervention” powers to keep us all safe. Perhaps such appraiser character is somehow vital to getting the volume of State housing sale traffic/values up where it might not otherwise exist? Seems vital to have these folks at-large as they make appraisals with air of licensed “good character”.
Tough cheese for us, perhaps a caveat to anyone considering purchasing any property at all within Oregon, but at least it shows there can be data online which at first glance seems proper but in reality no longer serves the public’s best interests and should be amended/deleted. Again, cudos to the EU for at least providing a mechanism for Judicial review in re propriety of maintaining certain types of internet information.
That is sad. I tried to see if there is any way to contact Google for correction of data in search results. But it says you have to contact data providers. That is, when you zoom in on Google maps, there is name of data provider just below the map (For example: data provided by XYZ). But since the contact address is not given, you have to google that and contact them for correction. You may try that.
Thank you in such regard; to simplify, I don’t know why in the USA data itself isn’t the “respondent” so that all one need do is establish impropriety of its maintenance, then receive some proper Court doc to give to anyone posting same…here, there are many complexities re service on parties, even if they can’t be found or show cause why a State in its own statutory power shouldn’t correct by suspension/revocation; this is especially tiresome when someone is using it improperly with the condonation of officials…two months ago, one of them even renewed his two-year appraiser permit, and paid $200 for an annual renewal of Sec of State listing as if at my address…State says yes it’s wrong, no, they won’t lift even fingers they otherwise have for themselves under law…if you look at the ACLB site it links to statutes it enforces, including ones which include “whether or not damage occurred”, so this is a HUGE favor they do for appraisers today.
Many times in past I’ve tried to get assorted discovered online sources to stop placing my home as contact for these people; a total of two entities did, all the rest including Google requiring a proper Court order; no one in USA businessland believes they need to question even obvious circumstances if the State won’t…and if after long steps toward finally getting Court permission to serve by publication, what if these bozos just file a different bogus name at my or any improper address, knowing the State WANTS them acting like that? Nothing outside of political will exists here to ensure privacy rights are protected in the way the EU envisions; I would parenthetically suggest anyone buying real estate in Oregon bring in their own accredited out-of-state or out-of-nation appraisers prior to purchase…the State here seems to think local appraisers are licensed to say/do anything with impugnity in the name of “improving sale values and volume”, so probably none will tell near the truth, and the same State licenses real estate inspectors/attorneys…with only one lawyer in the State advertising as a fraud case taker, probably the political will is unified here.
I do not know what to say. That is not only monopoly but misleading too. And there are no measures – as of now – to correct them. Hope something will come up in future.
Your sentiment is much appreciated. About all I can myself is proof such conditions exist; copies of the ACLB and Secretary of State communications to me (redacted, of course, for any publicly visible human subject identities) may currently be viewed at http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f18/030d11ba/KUMARA_zpsbc8f6128 dot png , and http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f18/030d11ba/KUMARB_zpse05f3be2 dot png (of course the words “dot” need replacement to “.” to work). I would not make such statements lightly, or in a forum at all unless they may be in the public interest. Thanks again, cheers!
Hello,i am Mrs Rebecca Nathan from Florida USA,i will really want to thank God so much for making me come in contact with Mr Zhang loan company after i have been scammed three time by fake lenders,their ways was very easy no credit check,no cosigner,no collateral and with just 2% interest rate, at first i never taught it is through because i have been scammed by fake lender so i find it difficult to believe them.. But with God i find trust in them and i receive my loan from them. they give loan of any amount and any currency. The name of the Loan Firm is GOD IS GOOD INSTANT LOAN FIRM, so i will advise anyone out there that need a loan to contact them via their Email: [email protected] [email protected]
,,.,KISAH NYATA ,,,,,,,
Aslamu alaikum wr wb..Allahu Akbar, Allahu akbar, Allahu akbar
Bismillahirrahamaninrahim,,senang sekali saya bisa menulis dan berbagi kepada
teman2 melalui room ini, sebelumnya dulu saya adalah seorang pengusaha dibidang
property rumah tangga dan mencapai kesuksesan yang luar biasa, mobil rumah dan
fasilitas lain sudah saya miliki, namun namanya cobaan saya sangat percaya
kepada semua orang, hingga suaatu saat saya ditipu dengan teman saya sendiri
dan membawa semua yng saya punya, akhirnya saya menaggung utang ke pelanggan
saya totalnya 470 juta dan di bank totalnya 800 juta , saya stress dan hamper
bunuh diri anak saya 2 orng masih sekolah di smp dan sma, istri saya pergi
entah kemana dan meninggalkan saya dan anakanaknya ditengah tagihan utang yg
menumpuk, demi makan sehari hari saya terpaksa jual nasi bungkus keliling dan
kue, ditengah himpitan ekonomi seperti ini saya bertemu dengan seorang teman
dan bercerita kepadanya, Alhamdulilah beliau memberikan saran kepada saya, dulu
katanya dia juga seperti saya stelah bergabung dengan KI JAMBRONG hidupnya
kembali sukses, awalnya saya ragu dan tidak percaya tapi selama satu minggu
saya berpikir dan melihat langsung hasilnya, saya akhirnya bergabung dan
menghubungi KI JAMBRONG di No 0853-1712-1219. Semua petunjuk AKI saya ikuti dan
hanya 3 hari Astagfirullahallazim, Alhamdulilah Demi AllAH dan anak saya,
akhirnya 5M yang saya minta benar benar ada di tangan saya, semua utang saya
lunas dan sisanya buat modal usaha, kini saya kembali sukses terimaksih KI
JAMBRONG saya tidak akan melupakan jasa AKI. JIKA TEMAN TEMAN BERMINAT, YAKIN
DAN PERCAYA INSYA ALLAH, SAYA SUDAH BUKTIKAN DEMI ALLAH SILAHKAN HUB KI
JAMBRONG DI 0853-1712-1219. (TANPA TUMBAL/AMAN).