Europe's move to rein in Google would stall in US

May 25, 2014 by Martha Mendoza

Europe's moves to rein in Google—including a court ruling this month ordering the search giant to give people a say in what pops up when someone searches their name—may be seen in Brussels as striking a blow for the little guy.

But across the Atlantic, the idea that users should be able to edit Google search results in the name of privacy is being slammed as weird and difficult to enforce at best and a crackdown on free speech at worst.

"Americans will find their searches bowdlerized by prissy European sensibilities," said Stewart Baker, former assistant secretary for policy at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. "We'll be the big losers. The big winners will be French ministers who want the right to have their last mistress forgotten."

Mountain View, California -based Google says it's still figuring out how to comply with the European Court of Justice's May 13 ruling, which says the company must respond to complaints about private information that turns up in searches. Google must then decide whether the public's right to be able to find the information outweighs an individual's right to control it—with preference given to the individual.

The judgment applies to all search engines operating within the European Union. But in practice that means Google, given that 90 percent of all online searches there use Google's search engine.

"The ruling has significant implications for how we handle takedown requests," Google spokesman Al Verney said. "This is logistically complicated, not least because of the many languages involved and the need for careful review. As soon as we have thought through exactly how this will work, which may take several weeks, we will let our users know."

There will be serious technological challenges, said U.S. privacy attorney David Keating in Atlanta.

"It seems aspirational, not a reality, to comply with such a standard," he said. "The reengineering necessary to implement the right to be forgotten is significant."

Google may partially automate the process, as it does with copyright-infringement complaints, but ultimately a human will have to decide when results should be sanitized.

Johannes Caspar, who as Hamburg's Commissioner for Data Protection acts as Germany's lead regulator of Google on privacy issues, confirmed the company is already working on an "online tool" to help people file complaints.

Because the court's ruling applies only within Europe, it will mean some fragmentation of search results. That is, Europeans and Americans will see slightly different versions of the Internet. A worst-case scenario would be if Google decides it must err on the side of caution and removes links liberally in order to avoid lawsuits, critics of the ruling said.

Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales, who has been an outspoken critic of the ruling, summarized it for The Associated Press as a "technologically incompetent violation of human rights." He said it amounts to censorship, and he predicted it will ultimately be scrapped.

"The danger is that search engines now are faced with an uncertain legal future which may require them to censor all kinds of things when someone thinks it is 'irrelevant'," Wales said.

In the wake of the decision, some Europeans are already asking to clean up their online history, though there may not yet have been a "flood" of hundreds of requests, including some from pedophiles and politicians, as was reported in the British press shortly after the ruling was handed down.

In Britain, David Murphy of the Information Commissioner's Office said "while we've had some people get in touch around this issue, we're simply telling them to speak to Google."

Officials in the Netherlands said they haven't had any new requests since the ruling.

Caspar, the German official, said his office has received 20 new requests, including some from people who won legal fights with websites to have material taken down—but the sites didn't comply because they were based abroad.

Differences between the U.S. and Europe over privacy have never been greater, sparked by revelations in documents leaked to the media by former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden that the NSA secretly broke into communications on Yahoo and Google abroad and targeted overseas telecoms, including German Chancellor Angela Merkel's own cellphone.

Joel Reidenberg, visiting professor of information technology policy at Princeton University, said the ruling was not surprising, "given the current tenor of US-European privacy relations as a result of the Snowden revelations."

A "fundamental divide" between the European and American worldview is becoming evident, he said.

"In Europe, there is a sense that privacy and control over personal data are basic human rights," he said. In America, freedom of speech and free-market solutions tend to prevail, he said.

Nico Sell, who runs San Francisco-based Wickr, an encrypted messaging service, said it would make more sense to let individuals, not tech giants, control their own online presence.

"The right to be forgotten is a great idea philosophically, but it is wrong to put the onus on Google or Facebook," she said. "They have no idea where all your data is, and this is not their job. We need to give consumers tools with the ability to add expiration dates to their personal data."

Explore further: Google says time needed to 'forget' people

3.3 /5 (8 votes)
add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Google EU data case raises censorship fears

May 14, 2014

A European Court of Justice decision ordering Google to delete some personal data on request has raised concerns about online censorship and how Internet search works in various countries.

Digital companies demand new Google anti-trust probe

May 15, 2014

The Open Internet Project, which includes 400 players in Europe's digital markets, lodged a complaint with the European Commission on Thursday against what it alleges are new anti-competitive abuses by Google

Recommended for you

Startups offer banking for smartphone users

1 hour ago

The latest banks are small enough to fit in the palm of your hand. Startups, such as Moven and Simple, offer banking that's designed specifically for smartphones, enabling users to track their spending on the go. Some things ...

'SwaziLeaks' looks to shake up jet-setting monarchy

Aug 29, 2014

As WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange prepares to end a two-year forced stay at Ecuador's London embassy, he may take comfort in knowing he inspired resistance to secrecy in places as far away as Swaziland.

Ecuador heralds digital currency plans (Update)

Aug 29, 2014

Ecuador is planning to create what it calls the world's first digital currency issued by a central bank, which some analysts believe could be a first step toward abandoning the country's existing currency, ...

WEF unveils 'crowdsourcing' push on how to run the Web

Aug 28, 2014

The World Economic Forum unveiled a project on Thursday aimed at connecting governments, businesses, academia, technicians and civil society worldwide to brainstorm the best ways to govern the Internet.

User comments : 6

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Sean_W
1 / 5 (1) May 25, 2014
Have these judges even ever used the Internet before? It doesn't sound like a ruling sane people would make unless they were completely ignorant about the topic. Google should shut down service to Europe and file WTO complaints against the EU if they allow other search sites to operate without conforming to the conditions.
N_D_
not rated yet May 25, 2014
If you operate world wide you'll still have to abide local laws. Lots of Europeans value their privacy quite vigorously. In countries like Germany, Informational Self Determination (=the right to choose what happens to your personal data) is a constitutional right and it's the job of courts and goverenments to regulate companies accordingly. The guys at Google are very smart so they'll devise a way and will still be able to make tons of money.

Oh... And this court ruling affects every search engine provider, of course.
Lex Talonis
not rated yet May 25, 2014
It might be better in just going for Googles jugular and getting them for global tax evasion.
_ilbud
May 26, 2014
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
alfie_null
not rated yet May 26, 2014
Oh... And this court ruling affects every search engine provider, of course.

And this court ruling affects ONLY search engines in the court's venue. Wouldn't it be a bit ironic if people within that venue had to resort to, say Baidu, to satisfy their needs for information on people whom Google has bowdlerized? What then, shall countries in the EU do? Set up firewalls? Punish their citizens for doing such searches?

All ethics and propriety aside, this is a largely meaningless gesture. It will cause Google some trouble. It won't hide your sordid past.

"The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it." - John Gilmore
hrfJC
not rated yet May 26, 2014
Wikipedia already allows editing of contents in millione of user generated entries. Why not give the option to individuals on google etc deleting unnecessary personal details?
sirchick
not rated yet May 29, 2014
Have these judges even ever used the Internet before? It doesn't sound like a ruling sane people would make unless they were completely ignorant about the topic. Google should shut down service to Europe and file WTO complaints against the EU if they allow other search sites to operate without conforming to the conditions.


Have YOU ever used the internet before???

"Shut down service to Europe"... if your server is in japan .. some one with internet any where in the world can still access your search engine. So the idea of "shutting down service to Europe" is just not even possible. Even a block won't work, you can just use a proxy.

Also never in a million years would they want to allow Bing! to get users over a dispute like this... money comes before political inconvenience. So even if it were possible to shut down from Europe, they would lose so much business to Bing! it would be the dumbest business move in history..