Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

E.U. Watchdogs Want “Right to Be Forgotten” Applied Worldwide

Currently, search results are scrubbed only in Google’s country-specific domains.

Reuters / Francois Lenoir

European privacy regulators want Internet search engines such as Google and Microsoft’s Bing to scrub results globally, not just in Europe, when people invoke their “right to be forgotten” as ruled by an E.U. court.

The European Union’s privacy watchdogs agreed on a set of guidelines on Wednesday to help them implement a ruling from Europe’s supreme court that gives people the right to ask search engines to remove personal information that is “inadequate, irrelevant or no longer relevant.”

Google, which dominates Internet searches in Europe, has been scrubbing results only from the European versions of its website, such as Google.de in Germany or Google.fr in France, meaning they still appear on Google.com.

“From the legal and technical analysis we are doing, they should include the ‘.com,’” said Isabelle Falque-Pierrotin, the head of France’s privacy watchdog and the Article 29 Working Party of E.U. national data protection authorities, at a news conference.

A spokesman for Google said the company had not yet seen the guidelines but would “study them carefully” when they are published.

Pierrotin said the guidelines should be published on Thursday or Friday.

Google previously said that it believed search results should be removed only from its European versions since Google automatically redirects people to the local versions of its search engine.

The issue of how far to push the “right to be forgotten” has divided experts and privacy regulators, with some arguing that Google’s current approach waters down the effectiveness of the ruling, given how easy it is to switch between different national versions.

Wednesday’s decision was another setback for Google, which is facing multiple investigations into its privacy policy and is mired in a four-year E.U. antitrust inquiry.

The ruling has pitted privacy advocates against free speech campaigners, who say allowing people to ask search engines to remove information would lead to a whitewashing of the past.

Pierrotin also said that notifying publishers and media outlets when their stories are delisted from search results would not be mandatory, as Google has previously argued.

“There is no legal basis for routine transmission from Google or any other search engine to the editors. It may in some cases be necessary, but not as a routine and not as an obligation,” she said.

Google’s decision to notify press outlets and webmasters via email was criticized by regulators earlier this year for sometimes bringing people’s names back into the open.

(editing by Jane Baird)

This article originally appeared on Recode.net.

More in Technology

Podcasts
Are humanoid robots all hype?Are humanoid robots all hype?
Podcast
Podcasts

AI is making them better — but they’re not going to be doing your chores anytime soon.

By Avishay Artsy and Sean Rameswaram
Future Perfect
The old tech that could help stop the next airborne pandemicThe old tech that could help stop the next airborne pandemic
Future Perfect

Glycol vapors, explained.

By Shayna Korol
Future Perfect
Elon Musk could lose his case against OpenAI — and still get what he wantsElon Musk could lose his case against OpenAI — and still get what he wants
Future Perfect

It’s not about who wins. It’s about the dirty laundry you air along the way.

By Sara Herschander
Life
Why banning kids from AI isn’t the answerWhy banning kids from AI isn’t the answer
Life

What kids really need in the age of artificial intelligence.

By Anna North
Culture
Anthropic owes authors $1.5B for pirating work — but the claims process is a Kafkaesque messAnthropic owes authors $1.5B for pirating work — but the claims process is a Kafkaesque mess
Culture

“Your AI monster ate all our work. Now you’re trying to pay us off with this piece of garbage that doesn’t work.”

By Constance Grady
Future Perfect
Some deaf children are hearing again because of a new gene therapySome deaf children are hearing again because of a new gene therapy
Future Perfect

A medical field that almost died is quietly fixing one disease at a time.

By Bryan Walsh