That the English Agency for Data Protection has decided to estimate the exercise of guardianship rights of opposition (and even cancellation) to be presented against Google, nobody questioned. What is not so clear is that this serves to eliminate the web presence of the data that drives our request. In other words, the AEPD has exhibited in various ways your opinion on this subject (that Google should remove the data and that the request can be sent to Google Spain, who is forced to deal with it), but the efficiency remains to be seen practicing their good wishes and intentions.
One thing can show up on the internet for various reasons:
- because a friend or family member hanging his picture on Facebook, tuenti or blog.
- Because there is a story that mentions him in a digital newspaper or paper that is part of the virtual library of some means.
- Because it has obtained a grant, approved an opposition, he has been pardoned, he has been fined or arrested, and the corresponding resolution is published in the Official Gazette.
- For a third party, bad faith, is using a blog, a forum or a private site to upload information about you that is false, offensive, or violates his honor.
Finally, the possibilities are many. Sometimes it will happen that will remove the data by contacting the company providing the service used by who gets the information to the network, or even responsible of publication. In other not because, simply, the publication is legal or business or entity that manages it considers it his duty to remove the data: That is true in most cases where data are published in the Official Gazette or in digital media, and also when the head of the publication is a public administration that follows an established procedure or gives publicity to certain measures.
Probably the Agency knows that in these cases will get little cooperation and involvement of those responsible for the websites: Neither the newspapers will stop publishing articles with names and names of those involved in them (they have the constitutional jurisprudence on his behalf to exercise the right to information and freedom of expression but violate other legitimate interests), or Public Administration, or the BOE will panic because they AEPD a proceeding (do not pay fines, gentlemen, the Agency did not tremble.)
And this, not to mention the cases where the publication is made by a third party in bad faith from outside Spain or anonymously. We give you an example. Imagine that you are a doctor and participates in various conferences and events, making it easy to find your data on professional websites. A guy in Colombia claims to have a surgery clinic, take your photograph and your CV to one of those web professionals and hang on your site saying that in the clinic and have their services ... Go to denounce Agency, see what they say ...
Maybe all this, the band AEPD caught by Google. "And your problem is resolved in these cases? When they began to esteem guardianships, thought so, but it has reached a point where Google has made the decision not to enforce the orders in the resolutions and to appeal AEPD the Audiencia Nacional. Is it appropriate to exercise the right of opposition to Google? Lose nothing. In addition, request the protection of the AEPD is free, does not need a lawyer or attorney. Not only wait for the Agency to move tab.
That is what you get for now: There are no quick solutions and 100% effective in all situations. Take a chance by contacting the webmasters, to exercise their rights of opposition and cancellation at Google, consult an attorney to file complaints or to initiate actions in defense of their honor ... but still can not get rid always, without exception data. Some solutions also will expand over time and entail significant costs. In short, we will not find a miracle in this field CrecePelo: If Mr Botin is bald, baldness can not be cured with money.
Oh, and finally, a tip: Do not say there that the right to digital oblivion is a fundamental right. Statements like that are typical of those who have passed Constitutional Political Law or sixth call . Only those fundamental rights in the legal positivised (or would Ihering, who was a very plain guy, which they are listed in an article).
Goodnight.
0 comments:
Post a Comment