Right To Be Forgotten

1354 Words6 Pages
The manner in which this right has been phrased i.e. “Right to be forgotten” poses a problem. The wordings right to be forgotten suggests that an individual has the right to stop and impose a duty on others from remembering him. One’s person right to be forgotten imposes the responsibility on someone else’s to forget others. The metric used in the judgment is extremely ambiguous and vague. The direct consequence of this will that, the interpretation could be open to abuse in absence of the clear rule applicable to the removal of the data. The application of this Right is available only against the data collector which in this case is Google. This step seems to be quite useless. Even if the link is removed from the Google it could still be…show more content…
Jeffrey Rosen in Stanford Law Review mentions the unresolved issue of the Judgement of how it ignores serious issues such as what obligations do search engines are required to remove the Data posted by a third party? In the age where information could easily be copied and re-posted by the third party in relation to an individual, how to deal with this? So for instance I co-authored a particular article nevertheless after a period of time I decided for some reason that this article should be removed from the Google, then the other author of the article will also be automatically affected. One of the vital stakeholder in this case is public which frequently collectively have an interest in the content available on the internet. Though as per the Judgment the right cannot be exercised when it is a particular issue is of public interest , there are serious loopholes in the Judgment which makes it difficult to guard essential public interest. The judgment entirely fails to deals with crucial questions where there is need to decide what would be the basis for deciding whether particular information is in public interest or not? Who is to be held accountable if the information regarding public interest is indeed removed? Upon whom does the burden of proof lies when it comes to deciding public…show more content…
How to judge public interest when it comes to removal of data from the interest becomes complex. There are number of factors that are to be considered such as what to do with the content that relate to public figure? What to do with the information regarding the professional conduct of person which are useful for the consumers to evaluate the standard of professionals? For instance what would happen in a situation where let’s say where a person against whom serious allegation of corruptions has been levelled and investigation is going on while in the intervening time he asks Google to remove the content or a person convicted of corruption ask Google to remove his information after he 20 years? There are legitimate public interest that is always at stake in the information available on
Open Document