Updating the regulatory compliance to a new era of globalization and IT development
The ECJ ruling involved the case of a Spanish man whose Google search results linked to a 1998 newspaper listing of a property auction, which mentioned his past social security debts. The Spanish regulator ruled that the paper need not remove the original official notice but Google had to stop linking to it. Europe's most senior judges have concurred.
Is the verdict that Google should erase the web's memory is the same as history is hidden from the collective view.
Did the European Court of Justice display poor judgment when it ruled on the basis of a 19-year-old directive requiring Google to remove some search results that people do not like.
The obscure logic in this case is to classifying internet search engines as "data controllers" along with publishers and holders of personal data such as government computers. However, this only shows that the EU's 1995 data protection directive needs to be updated.
The irrationality of the Luxembourg ruling is that search engines will no longer be allowed to link to stories and information that are published legally. This is not like copyright enforcement in the US, under which music and film companies can get Google to remove links to illegal content piracy sites.
Probably the stories on the net will not be forgotten just merely harder for others to find. However if the publishers can keep a story public, Google equally has the right to link to it
Technology has changed a lot rather in the decades since the EU data directive was drafted.
