Criminals can claim 'right to be forgotten' following landmark Google case

Criminals can claim 'right to be forgotten' following landmark Google case

Criminals can claim 'right to be forgotten' following landmark Google case

Google was told by a London judge to remove links to older stories about a businessman's criminal conviction from search results, in a United Kingdom case that could dramatically expand Europe's "Right to Be Forgotten" law.

A second request for Google search results to be expunged for another man was refused because the man had not shown remorse for his crime of conspiracy to account falsely and had misled the court and the public concerning the case, The Telegraph reported.

They argued their convictions were now legally spent and they had both been rehabilitated.

Data giant Google has lost a landmark legal case in Britain, forcing it to recognize the right of two claimants to have information about themselves purged from the company's online records.

Justice Mark Warby said in a ruling Friday that one story in a national United Kingdom newspaper was "misleading as to the nature and extent of the claimant's criminality".

Judges ruled that neither of the men should be identified as part of the case.

Google has lost a "right to be forgotten" case to a man who wanted links to information about a previous conviction to be removed from the site.

The businessman who won his case was convicted 10 years ago of conspiring to intercept communications.

Their lawyers said their claims, which were brought under data protection law and for misuse of private information, were the first of their kind to be made in England. He similarly petitioned Google to remove search results about a crime he had committed, for which he served four years in jail.

"The right to be forgotten is meant to apply to information that is no longer relevant but disproportionately impacts a person", said Jim Killock, executive director.

Mr Justice Warby told the High Court: He has not accepted his guilt, has misled the public and this court, and shows no remorse over any of these matters.

However, the judge ruled out any damages payment.

'He remains in business, and the information serves the objective of minimising the risk that he will continue to mislead, as he has in the past, ' he said.

We work hard to comply with the right to be forgotten, but we take great care not to remove search results that are in the public interest and will defend the public's right to access lawful information.

RTBF was established through a 2014 ruling by the European Court of Justice. The Alphabet Inc. unit must remove information about a person on request if it's outdated or irrelevant under a 2014 European Union top court ruling. However, search engines can decline to remove pages if they judge them to remain in the public interest. In those circumstances, "the public interest in having information with his name about this case doesn't prevail".

Some 669,355 requests for links to be removed from the search engine results have been made to Google since the ruling.

How researchers will protect your Facebook data from thieves
Premier League clubs: No VAR in 2018-19 season