Google’s search engine is covered by federal privacy law, a court has ruled, opening the door for people to demand to have their names made unsearchable – commonly known as a “right to be forgotten.”
The man said outdated and inaccurate information about him in newspaper articles found on the internet was leading to great personal harm, including physical assault, employment discrimination, severe social stigma and persistent fear.
Ultimately, the Privacy Commissioner asked the Federal Court to rule on its jurisdiction to address the complaint under the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act.
The ruling authorizes the Privacy Commissioner to review the complaint to determine whether it should recommend to Google that the complainant’s name be delisted from the search engine.
In carrying out that purpose, Google is agnostic as to the nature of that content: nothing turns on whether or not it is journalistic, let alone on whether it meets certain aspirational standards of journalism.
Mr. Fenrick, the complainant’s co-counsel, said laws exist in Europe and in Quebec to allow people to press for their names to be delisted, and require privacy and autonomy to be balanced against the public’s right to know.
The original article contains 873 words, the summary contains 195 words. Saved 78%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Google’s search engine is covered by federal privacy law, a court has ruled, opening the door for people to demand to have their names made unsearchable – commonly known as a “right to be forgotten.”
The man said outdated and inaccurate information about him in newspaper articles found on the internet was leading to great personal harm, including physical assault, employment discrimination, severe social stigma and persistent fear.
Ultimately, the Privacy Commissioner asked the Federal Court to rule on its jurisdiction to address the complaint under the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act.
The ruling authorizes the Privacy Commissioner to review the complaint to determine whether it should recommend to Google that the complainant’s name be delisted from the search engine.
In carrying out that purpose, Google is agnostic as to the nature of that content: nothing turns on whether or not it is journalistic, let alone on whether it meets certain aspirational standards of journalism.
Mr. Fenrick, the complainant’s co-counsel, said laws exist in Europe and in Quebec to allow people to press for their names to be delisted, and require privacy and autonomy to be balanced against the public’s right to know.
The original article contains 873 words, the summary contains 195 words. Saved 78%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!