当前位置: X-MOL 学术Comput. Law Secur. Rev. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Disclosure, Exposure and the ʻRight to be Forgottenʼ after Google Spain: Interrogating Google Search's webmaster, end user and Lumen notification practices
Computer Law & Security Review ( IF 3.3 ) Pub Date : 2020-07-15 , DOI: 10.1016/j.clsr.2020.105437
David Erdos

This article argues that Google's essentially blanket and unsafeguarded dissemination to webmasters of URLs delisted under the Google Spain judgment disclosures claimants’ personal data, cannot be justified either on the purported basis of their consent or a legal requirement but instead seriously infringes European data protection standards. Such disclosure would only be compatible with the initially contextually sensitive context of collection where it was (i) reasonably necessary and explicitly limited to the purposes of checking the legality of the initial decision and/or bona fide research and (ii) prevented unauthorised repurposing or other misuse through robust safeguards. Strict necessity thresholds would need to apply where disclosure involved special categories of data or was subject to reasoned objection by a data subject and international transfers would require further controls, ideally as provided by the European Commission's standard contractual clauses. Disclosing identifiable data on removals to end users would directly and fundamentally undermine a data subject's rights and, therefore, ipso facto violate purpose limitation and legality, irrespective of whether rights are claimed in data protection, defamation or civil privacy. The public's legitimate interests in receiving information on personal data removals are best secured through safeguarded scientific research, which search engines should facilitate.



中文翻译:

Google西班牙之后的披露,曝光和“被遗忘的权利” :询问Google搜索的网站管理员,最终用户和流明通知惯例

本文认为,根据Google西班牙判决书披露索赔人的个人数据,Google基本上是一揽子,毫无保障地向URL的网站管理员散布,无论是声称的同意还是法律要求都不能证明其合理性,而是严重违反了欧洲数据保护标准。此类披露仅与以下情况相匹配:(i)合理必要且明确地仅限于检查初始决定和/或善意研究的合法性,以及(ii)防止未经授权的重新使用或通过强有力的保障措施来解决其他滥用问题。如果披露涉及特殊类别的数据或受到数据主体的合理反对,则需要采用严格的必要性阈值,而国际转移则需要进一步的控制,最好是按照欧洲委员会标准合同条款的规定。向最终用户披露有关删除的可识别数据将直接并从根本上破坏数据主体的权利,因此,事实上,无论是在数据保护,诽谤中还是在个人隐私中主张权利,都违反了目的限制和合法性。通过受保护的科学研究,可以最好地确保公众在接收有关个人数据删除信息方面的合法权益,而搜索引擎应对此提供帮助。理想情况下,按照欧洲委员会的标准合同条款提供。向最终用户披露有关删除的可识别数据将直接并从根本上破坏数据主体的权利,因此,事实上,无论是在数据保护,诽谤中还是在个人隐私中主张权利,都违反了目的限制和合法性。通过受保护的科学研究,可以最好地确保公众在接收有关个人数据删除信息方面的合法权益,而搜索引擎应对此提供帮助。理想情况下,按照欧洲委员会的标准合同条款提供。向最终用户披露有关删除的可识别数据将直接并从根本上破坏数据主体的权利,因此,事实上,无论是在数据保护,诽谤中还是在个人隐私中主张权利,都违反了目的限制和合法性。通过受保护的科学研究,可以最好地确保公众在接收有关个人数据删除信息方面的合法权益,而搜索引擎应对此提供帮助。诽谤或公民隐私。通过受保护的科学研究,可以最好地确保公众在接收有关个人数据删除信息方面的合法权益,而搜索引擎应对此提供帮助。诽谤或公民隐私。通过受保护的科学研究,可以最好地确保公众在接收有关个人数据删除信息方面的合法权益,而搜索引擎应对此提供帮助。

更新日期:2020-07-15
down
wechat
bug