Online news and privacy: Are online news archives affected by a “right to be forgotten”?
Loading...
Date
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
Is there a right to be deleted out of the online records ? Today’ s news are yesterday´s news tomorrow and therefore “old”. But news which are not news anymore might, in legal aspects, be treated differently than real new news. Not only after the release of the European Court of Justice (CJEU) judgement on Google Spain, the “right to be forgotten” or the right to be “de-listed” is an issue for online archives.
The judgement expands the existing privacy responsibilities for personal information on search engines. In the mentioned ruling, the court found, that “the operator of a search engine is obliged to remove from the list of results displayed following a search made on the basis of a person’s name links to web pages, published by third parties and containing information relating to that person, …even, as the case may be, when its publication in itself on those pages is lawful.” Anyway, this applies not in every case, but, respective to the ruling, only after pondering the right to access to information and the right to privacy. But this does not make it easier.
(How) can this right to be de-listed affect online-news-archives managed by libraries ? In different countries of the EU, judgements on online newspaper archives, already years before the CJEU decision, had shaped principles for balancing privacy of individuals and free speech/freedom of the press in online archives. This talk will discuss if or how the Google judgement on the right to be forgotten” or national court decisions can affect the making available of online news by libraries, especially when they are old “news”.
Description
Keywords
Citation
Information from German RDA, 2.13 („Definition newspaper“)
l https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspaper
e.g., in Germany: §§ 5, 9, 38a Federal Data Protection Act (BDSG): https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_bdsg/index.html
E.g., Berlin press code, § 22a
§§ 5, 9, 38a Federal Data Protection Act: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_bdsg/index.html
§ 22 KunstUrhG: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/kunsturhg/__22.html
§ 23 KunstUrhG: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/kunsturhg/__23.html
Oberlandesgericht (OLG) Frankfurt (Urt. v. 23.12.2008, Az. 11 U 22/08, 11 U 21/08); § 24 KunstUrhG: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/kunsturhg/__24.htmlm
OLG München, Urteil vom v. 17.3.2016 - Az. 29U 368/16: https://rsw.beck.de/cms/?toc=mmr.root&docid=378515
Constitutional Court, BVerfG, 10.06.2009 - 1 BvR 1107/09
Supreme Court (BGH), Urteil v. 09.02.2010, Az. VI ZR 243/08; http://tlmd.in/u/1022
Constitutional Court, BVerfGE 97, 391, 404 f.
Personality right, Privacy: Art. 1 par 1 and Art.2 par.1 Grundgesetz (Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany: http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_gg/index.html ) and also Art.8 par.1 European Convention of Human Rights, ECHR (https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/sites/digital-agenda/files/Convention_ENG.pdf ); Freedom of speech and press: Art.5 par.1 Grundgesetz and Art. 10 ECHR
BGH, Urteil vom 16. Februar 2016 (Az.: VI ZR 367/15); http://juris.bundesgerichtshof.de/cgi- bin/rechtsprechung/document.py?Gericht=bgh&Art=en&Datum=Aktuell&Sort=12288&Seite=0&nr=74175&pos=7&anz=619
Supreme Court (BGH), Urteil v. 09.02.2010, Az. VI ZR 243/08: http://tlmd.in/u/1022
Judgement from May 13, 2014, Case C‑131/12
CJEU C‑131/12, par. 14
Oberlandesgericht Hamburg, Urteil vom 07.07.2015, 7 U 29/12: http://www.rechtsprechung-hamburg.de/jportal/portal/page/bsharprod.psml?doc.id=KORE217942015&st=ent&showdoccase=1¶mfromHL=true
Tribunal Suprema, 2015/10/15, sentencia número 545/2015: http://www.poderjudicial.es/cgpj/es/Poder-Judicial/Noticias-Judiciales/El-Supremo-reconoce-el--derecho-al-olvido--digital-de-dos-procesados-implicados-en-un-caso-de-drogas-en-los-ochenta. Reports: http://noticias.juridicas.com/actualidad/noticias/10588-primera-sentencia-del-ts-sobre-el-derecho-al-olvido:-si-los-interesados-lo-solicitan-la-informacion-obsoleta-sobre-personas-sin-relevancia-publica-puede-no-ser-buscable/ ; http://elpais.com/elpais/2015/10/20/inenglish/1445336346_537716.html
http://www.knack.be/nieuws/belgie/cassatie-recht-om-vergeten-te-worden-geldt-ook-voor-krantenarchieven/article-normal-706165.html
https://derechosdigitales.org/9324/una-panoramica-sobre-la-discusion-en-torno-al-derecho-al-olvido-en-la-region/ ; http://www.ifla.org/files/assets/clm/statements/rtbf_background.pdf
Corte Constitucional de Colombia, Sentencia T-277/15: http://www.corteconstitucional.gov.co/relatoria/2015/t-277-15.htm; http://iuscomparatum.info/colombia-constitutional-court-rules-on-the-right-to-be-forgotten/
http://www.hoganlovells.com/files/Uploads/Documents/Newsflash_A_Right_to_be_Forgotten_in_Hong_Kong_HKGLIB01_1452118.pdf
http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=d0104b8c-0e72-4b58-be59-e4adc08dc6f0
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2014/12/09/national/crime-legal/right-to-be-forgotten-on-the-internet-gains-traction-in-japan/#.Vk3wbHbnu; http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/03/31/national/yahoo-japan-sets-procedure-search-result-removal/#.Vk3wHXbnuU : (Plaintiff X v. Yahoo Japan Inc.((ワ)第2893号Kyoto district court, 2014.Aug. 7 京都地方裁判所: (ネ)第2415号Osaka high court, 2015.Feb.18控訴審 大阪高等裁判所第9民事部) ; Plaintiff X v. Google Japan Inc.((ワ)第2894号Kyoto district court, 2014.Sep.17 京都地方裁判所第6民事部); Plaintiff X v. Yahoo Japan Inc.((ワ)第241号Kobe district court, 2015.Feb.5 神戸地方裁判所尼崎支部第2民事部);
National Institute for the Access to Information (INAI), Carlos Sánchez de la Peña v. Google México, S. de R.L., PPD.0094/14
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32016R0679&from=EN
Recital 156
IFLA Code of Ethics for Librarians and other Information Workers, http://www.ifla.org/news/ifla-code-of-ethics-for-librarians-and-other-information-workers-full-version
IFLA Statement on the Right to be Forgotten; http://www.ifla.org/publications/node/10320