Building upon some of the issues discussed in our group presentation on Tuesday.
Google v Costeja González (C-131/12 (2014)) declared Google was a “data controller.” As a result of this declaration, Google is required to remove data on a person which is “inadequate, irrelevant, or no longer relevant.” This articulation of the law created a “right to be forgotten” for classes of information showing up in Google’s search index. This included a right to have personal data delinked from a user’s name if it was no longer relevant. In Europe, GDPR codified this right into law.
Techdirt wrote an article about these delinking claims in the original Google action – highlighting a New York Times Article from 2002 about a legal action by the FTC going after a group of companies run by Thomas Goolnik. These companies were accused of “unfair or deceptive acts or practices” by selling domain names that did not exist at the time. Goolnik eventually settled with the FTC.
Google upon ‘anonymous’ request delinked the NY Times story about Goolnik’s legal troubles with the FTC. Techdirt later received notification saying their article providing comment on the delinked NY Times article had also been delinked. Techdirt responded writing an article about how their article was delinked. They are currently on their fourth article about the delinking issue seemingly stuck in a never-ending cycle of comment and delinking. Their current article finishes with a request from Goolnik stating, “if you are reading this, please stop.”
This somewhat comical story further builds upon some of the odd consequences of GDPR that were discussed in our group presentation (e.g. How GDPR nearly ruined Christmas.) However, this example highlights tensions with other relevant rights such as freedom of expression and freedom of the press. Techdirt claim their current stories are not about Goolnik’s original legal dispute and more about the right to be forgotten issues. What weight should the right to be forgotten have against these other globally recognised rights? And at what point does a story become too remote from a person for their right to be forgotten to take precedence? Finally, one has to question whether this is evidence of the possible opportunity for manipulation of the right to be forgotten as Techdirt predicted early on in the GDPR debates.
The article can be found here: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20181003/23545140776/thomas-goolnik-gets-google-to-forget-our-story-about-him-getting-google-to-forget-stories-about-thomas-goolnik.shtml