The committee will determine the Google-driven Internet-related privacy

Madrid, 21 June (EFE).- The expert committee created by Google to clarify legal aspects difficult to interpret following the judgment of “right to be forgotten” lay the foundations for future Internet-related privacy, Efefuturo explained to one of its members, the Spanish lawyer Jose Luis Pinar.

Last 13 May, the Court of Justice of the European Uniondetermined that Google and other search engines on the Internet, now considered as controllers of content and not just informative straps, must remove links to harmful content provided that certain conditions are met.

The expert committee created after consulting Google consists of five international experts, under the direction of Eric Schmidt, former Google, y David Drummond, global head of legal services company.

Besides José Luis Pinar, former director of the Spanish Data Protection Agency (AEPD), also rector of International Relations at CEU San Pablo University and Professor of Administrative Law, made part of Jimmy Wales, founder of Wikipedia; Frank La Rue, Special Rapporteur ONU, Luciano Floridi and teachers (University of Oxford) Peggy Valcke y (Leuven).

A paper commissioned these experts following the judgment, motivated by the case of Spanish Mario Costeja, resident A Coruña, and “tenacity” AEPD in defense of citizen data protection will help to clarify difficult issues of interpretation of the judgment.

This has been assured in an interview with Efefuturo, Professor Pinar, Google also director of the CEU Chair Privacy, Innovation and Society, Master and Privacy taught at the university, who has advanced that the document has been entrusted to them must be completed by the end of this year or early 2015.

“We have to issue a study or assessment analysis Google how to implement the policy”, explained the expert.

This committee, that their work has not started yet, but has already established contacts to set agendas, maintain physical and virtual meetings to clarify situations that would legally protected right to cancel the data or forgotten based on the judgment and the information that would prevail.

He said that the sentence is very difficult to implement because they are not legally clear all respects: how it applies in each case, prevails in what situations the right to privacy against freedom of information, what does public relevance, etc..

Pinar considers important the adoption of a legally binding international instrument on data protection to standardize the rules of the game in the world.

Traditional territorial realities, bounded by physical boundaries, internet do not match, a space that has none, noted the expert.

Google has been growing exponentially over claims “right to be forgotten” following the judgment; Just a few days ago exceeded the 40.000, a good number of them from pedophiles, he lamented the expert.

Violations, Serial Murder, child abuse… Initially, one could think of the prevalence of right to information privacy against the perpetrators of such crimes but do not always have to be so, he stressed.

What would happen, for example, with an old rapist regretted his actions with his time served and socially reintegrated want to restart your life or a corrupt former politician who has already paid its debts and wants to regain his anonymity.

The judgment gives rise to several “paradoxes”, Pine grove has insisted. Curiously, the Spanish Mario Costeja, which led to the judgment if, to demand the removal of links to newspaper La Vanguardia by an old unpaid debt to Social Security, is more public than ever, the opposite of what you want.

Given its current public importance, one would think that the European ruling does not endorse him for claiming the withdrawal of links to information about his court case, where newsworthy priority over the right to privacy.

Moreover, the judgment gives more power even if it is the giant Google, which has been given the baton to ponder, under Criteria, what is deleted and what not, without necessity nobody claim, but without prejudice to the final decision in his case it is for the Courts, prior claim to the data protection authorities.

“I am very concerned” the power of Google, Pinar although the company is confident that the use of objective criteria, to maintain its reliability.

Amaya Quincoces Riesco

(Reuters)