defenders right to be forgotten online support information may be outdated, misleading and downright wrong
The Internet has a long memory. You can remember things long after others have forgotten. In some cases, this can lead to a pleasant surprise: long lost pictures, an old joke, a fragment of a distant call
But more and more people are discovering that the long memory of the Internet can be misleading, malicious, or just plain wrong. And they take the fight to the large deposits of personal data - mainly, but not only Google and Facebook
Take Mario Costeja. Google his name and one of the first things we found is that had financial problems in the 1990s and was forced to sell his house to pay a debt.
That was 15 years ago. Costeja argues that in a world where customers, employers and the fans are the people that the interests of Google, the information is misleading and damage to his reputation as an expert in forensic graphology reliable is totally unfair.
"He was a friend first told me about it," he said in a telephone interview from the Spanish city of northwest of La Coruna. "The debt is paid, but the official announcement placed in the forefront when suddenly appeared in Google when the newspaper archives digitized their later years.
"even changed one letter of my name of my business cards," he said. "This way, people do not find me. These days everyone looks to Google."
"The debt is paid," he said. "But it seems they were not obliged to publish the fact that you paid. At these times you lose your dignity and you may lose your house, but then having to lose its reputation as it is on the internet forever? "
Costeja became a pioneer of the idea of ??the "right to be forgotten" to its lawsuit against Google to the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg, a decision is expected later this year. But he is not alone.
Max Schrems, an Austrian law degree in 25 years, led a vocal campaign against what it claims are illegal practices Facebook collection and marketing of personal data users, often without their consent . Schrems complained to the Privacy Commissioner of Irish data (European Facebook users are managed by its Irish subsidiary) that the social networking site held 1,200 pages of personal data concerning him, even if he had removed much.
"The problem is that the Irish have little chance of implementation. Tried to negotiate with Facebook and its 15 lawyers and mediation was totally unbalanced," he said. "My case with Facebook moving in the right direction, but it goes as far as the Irish authorities push to go, so this is a very slow process, but we have several things like a new privacy policy and changes retention of data so that certain data must be deleted after one year. Much has left our case so far, but there are still 80% of the law are not respected.
"Right now, if I park in the wrong place, I have to pay a fine. Facebook If you do something wrong, you do not have to pay anything. There is a law, but there are no consequences. "
new EU rules on the right to be forgotten are defended by the EU Commissioner for Justice, Viviane Reding, announcing the possibility of severe penalties for companies that refuse to honor requests clients to delete personal data. "Now they feel there is a danger that the fines," said Schrems. "It changes the game plan."
Recent polls show that the public - in the UK and elsewhere - feel maybe it's time to restore balance. Research published by Big Brother Watch Group confidentiality pressure in February found that 68% of people in Britain have expressed concern about privacy on the Internet, with 22% said they were "very concerned" .
personal data and private information can be filtered in a number of ways. Respondents to a survey of readers of The Guardian about her experience of Internet privacy frequent complaints launched the following:
delete• Difficulties with social networking accounts and ensure that all data is erased
• Problems with the Google search function that raises the obsolete, biased or incorrect about an individual at the head of the search results.
• Lack of control over the photos posted by others.
• Concerns internet "tracking" software that monitors the use and built an image of Internet habits of an individual.
Costeja case falls into the second category. The first time I complained, the agency of Spain's Data Protection ruled partially in favor. La Vanguardia newspaper, which published the information was protected by the freedom of expression or the right to information and therefore he was not required to remove the object. The information was true and was part of a property list, published in the Journal of Law, which belongs to the debtor that the government intends to sell electricity.
think Google could easily understand the type of button that is used to report abuse YouTube "right to be forgotten" applications. Mu?oz said other countries that sent representatives to the court, including Italy and Austria, with the support of the Spanish position. But Google said that it is the freedom of expression and fight censorship. He argued that - as a company operating in the United States - European Directive does not apply to search engines and they do not process personal data or control. The company told the court it was a simple data through published and indexed. "There are clear social reasons why this information should be accessible to the public," William Echikson Google, wrote in a web. "People should not stop learning a politician was convicted of accepting a bribe, or a doctor has been found guilty of negligence. 
Find best price for : --Viktor----Nathalie----Echikson----William----YouTube----Viviane----Costeja----Mario----Google--
0 comments:
Post a Comment