Derecho al olvido
Thanks to him millions of European citizens can now ask and obtain that Google and the managers of any other search engine must de-index any web page that concerns them, abandoning it, in fact, adrift in the sea of the web. He, however, Mario Cotija Gonzalez must resign himself to the idea that looking for oblivion has entered – perhaps forever – in history and that for this reason the citizens of the whole world have and will have, who knows for how long,
The right to interrogate Google and every another search engine with his name and surname and access all the information concerning him. This is the summary of the decision – in some ways paradoxical – reached in recent days by the Spanish Privacy Protection Authority, rejecting an appeal by Mr. Cotija Gonzalez, or the Spanish citizen from whom the now well-known legal matter which then led, in May of last year, the Court of Justice of the European Union to establish that anyone derecho al olvido,
Right to be Forgotten
To protect their right to be forgotten, can ask a search engine to dissociate their name from any information published online as long as there is no overriding public interest in knowing the information itself. In March 2015, Mr. Cotija Gonzalez – after having unsuccessfully made a similar request to Google and having been rejected – had asked the Spanish Authority for the protection of privacy to order Big.
G to de-index a post in which he retraced his own story – that is, exactly the one relating to his debts towards the Spanish royal coffers of which, in the end, thanks to the Judgment of the Court of Justice, he had obtained the de-indexing – and some details were added on the his personal life, going so far as to publish a photograph of him.
Personal Data
But the Spanish agency for the protection of personal data, this time, has agreed to Google that in saying no to the request for de-indexing sent to him by Mr. Cotija Gonzalez had replied that “In this case, it seems that the URL that you are asked to de-index includes information about you that is relevant to the public and not out of date. Therefore, we can conclude that the reference to this material in the search results is justified by the public interest in having access to it “, also sharing what was later added, by Google itself before the insistence of Mr. Gonzalez:” Google Inc. has reviewed the complainant’s request and found that the URL that is the subject of the de-indexing request refers to information and opinions that are of unquestionable public interest and relevance.
In particular, it is a link to a post published on a personal blog in which information and opinions relating to the procedure before the Court of Justice of the European Union C 131/12 are propose. As established by the Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 13 May 2014, the right to data protection must give way to freedom of expression and information when the information for which de-indexing is requested refers to matters that are of general interest sharenting que es.
Particular Interest
In this sense, it cannot be denied that Mr. (X) is part of recent history, being a party in a judicial proceeding of particular interest and public interest. In particular, his name will forever be associated with an important ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union. Furthermore, it should not be overlooked that Mr. (X) has never shown scruples in exposing himself publicly, giving interviews and expressing his opinion on the legal proceedings in which he was an interested party. The fact that Mr. (X) has deliberately decided to actively contribute to the public debate through his continued participation in written media interviews, data protection.
Mr. (X) cannot now take action against his own actions ”. And the Spanish Privacy Guarantor, in its decision of recent days, makes its own – almost word for word – the reasons with which Google has rejected the sender’s request for oblivion of the man who has forced it to recognize oblivion by the hundreds of millions of European citizens ”. Revenge is a dish that must be served cold, says an old proverb and – if you want to allow yourself a joke in a story in which revenge obviously has little to do with it – one could maliciously conclude that Google.
Symptomatic
This dish, towards Mr. Cotija Gonzalez, has just tasted it and tasted it with satisfaction. But joking aside, the story – which from a legal point of view naturally deserves much more study – is symptomatic of the risks associated with the so-called “Streisand effect” which occurs when the attempt to remove data from the Internet causes a diametrically opposite effect and which must its name to actress Barbra Streisand who in 2003, in an attempt to see the aerial photo of her Californian villa deleted from the Net, instead got it bounced on thousands of blogs and newspapers mario costeja gonzález.
