Is the ‘right to be forgotten’ becoming a sure-fire way of being remembered?
By Jennie Sumpster and Sam Ahuja
While the idea of having unfavourable results removed from a search engine such as Google would seem a simple way to protect your reputation, it looks as if for some the ‘right to be forgotten’ may quickly become a sure-fire way of being remembered.
Over the last week, many would have seen the notice ‘some results may have been removed under data protection law in Europe’ appear at the bottom of Google’s search pages, indicating that Google has started to take action following the ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union in May (although it is worth noting that this notice appears on the search results yielded by some who have not submitted such requests as well as those who have). However, this week, publishers such as the Guardian and Daily Mail are fighting back in the form of articles devoted to highlighting precisely where search results have been removed and even going so far as to provide fresh links to the offending content within their articles…
Click on the link below to read the rest of the Schillings briefing.
Briefings from Schillings
George Clooney has released a long statement condemning the Daily Mail for what he claims was a ‘completely fabricated’ article about his fiancée Amal Alamuddin’s mother.
Up until now, journalists have been allowed to sit in private divorce hearings but they have, in most cases, been unable to report on most of what they hear.
Analysis from The Lawyer
ABSs arrived just two years ago but their impact on the profession is already deep. In a pre-Awards debate, our shortlisters discuss the rough and smooth of the transition