{"title":"Google v. CNIL and the Right to Be Forgotten: A Judgment of Solomon","authors":"B. Martín","doi":"10.54648/gplr2020008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The EUCJ ruling on Case C-507/17 provides further clarity on the territorial scope of the right to be forgotten. The court interprets that the EU law does not require a search engine operator to attend the right to de-referencing on all the versions of its search engine globally, but only on those corresponding to all the Member States, but at the same time it also clarifies that a supervisory or judicial authority of a Member State remains competent to, after weighing up the legally protected interests, order (where appropriate) that the de-referencing is carried out on all versions of the relevant search engine. A decision that likely does not please either the search engines or the data subjects, and which drops a certain dose of uncertainty on the system.\nGDPR, right to be forgotten, right to de-referencing, search engines, territorial scope","PeriodicalId":127582,"journal":{"name":"Global Privacy Law Review","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Privacy Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/gplr2020008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The EUCJ ruling on Case C-507/17 provides further clarity on the territorial scope of the right to be forgotten. The court interprets that the EU law does not require a search engine operator to attend the right to de-referencing on all the versions of its search engine globally, but only on those corresponding to all the Member States, but at the same time it also clarifies that a supervisory or judicial authority of a Member State remains competent to, after weighing up the legally protected interests, order (where appropriate) that the de-referencing is carried out on all versions of the relevant search engine. A decision that likely does not please either the search engines or the data subjects, and which drops a certain dose of uncertainty on the system.
GDPR, right to be forgotten, right to de-referencing, search engines, territorial scope