Re: European court reaches verdict with profound impact in Internet
The problem is not as black and white as you paint it. The real problem with the Internet is that legislators do not know how to legislate rights and regulations to deal properly with civil and human rights and intellectual property rights and the US based companies are the ones profiting the most. Privacy International, based in the UK and the European Digital Rights Platform, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and many more have over the past ten years given accurate reports of how privacy rights are violated, large scale by corporations selling consumer data to anyone including federal agencies. With the advent of the Internet of Things there exists the real danger that mobility tracking data, cell phone data, short range and remote sensor tracking data as well as medical data generated through wearables and medical apps end up where they should not. The freedom of speech and the right to access to information cannot be a free pass to big data mining to sell private data to the highest bidder, in casu medical data to e.g. pharmaceutical companies, which btw are allowed to show commercials hawking medical drugs and pharmaceuticals on TV only in the US and when I last checked in New Zealand. It boils down to who owns the private data about an individual once it is on the Net, the US stance is that, it is -subject to certain restrictions - public domain, the European Union is that the individual has the final say, and to a certain extent rightfully so. Again when I made the suggestion that the edit on an offending item on the Internet be updated through mediation of a national agency supervising privacy and digital rights, two options remain, removal of the offending item itself, or tagging the item with an update. The former would exempt the search engine company, the latter would exempt the creator of the offending item. What we need to avoid at all cost is the notion of 'digital profiling', whether it be done by search engine algorithms or the individual erasing 'inconvenient' personal history. Already I have been receiving some buzz about possible meetings between privacy and digital rights organizations to start making sense out of privacy, digital, human and intellectual property rights in the emerging new field of the Internet of Things, big data mining and the Internet of humans. Do not get me wrong, I think Google and US search engines have a right to exist and do what they do, but who ends up doing what with their search engine results is out of their hands. I hope that in the end common sense backed by expert technical advice from those most knowledgeable prevails and in fact the industry must now together with privacy and digital rights organizations work out practical and feasible scenarios. So we are back to square one, the global digital bill of rights proposed by Tim Berners-Lee, not just some European Union bill. Milton Ponson GSM: +297 747 8280 PO Box 1154, Oranjestad Aruba, Dutch Caribbean Project Paradigm: A structured approach to bringing the tools for sustainable development to all stakeholders worldwide by creating ICT tools for NGOs worldwide and: providing online access to web sites and repositories of data and information for sustainable development This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. On Saturday, May 17, 2014 9:08 PM, Simon Spero sesunc...@gmail.com wrote: IANAL but: Surely all Google, or any US search engine, would need to do is close down all local subsidiaries in states that are subject to the ECJ. EU member states would be free to attempt to block all access to google (or to refer the reasonableness of the preliminary ruling back to the ECJ; the explicit decision to allow the content provider to continue to serve the document at issue). Showing willingness to cut your population off from the big three search engines because the EU loves Spanish criminals would be an act of quite remarkable political courage in the week leading up to what could be the surliest European Parliamentary elections to date. If any litigant were to seek enforcement of a judgement of this kind against Google in California, I would expect to see summary judgement granted against them, as in the district court trial in LICRA v. Yahoo! ; the 9th circuit rulings against Yahoo! were based on ripeness, and the case was remanded for dismissal *without* prejudice.
Re: European court reaches verdict with profound impact in Internet
My point of view is shared by most members of EDRI, the European Digital Rights platform. Google is forced to change everything including offensive content from e.g. FaceBook!!! And because of the European legalese the verdict will also apply generically to all other search engine companies. And btw my concept of Orwellian is the European one not the US version. From Wikipedia; Orwellian is an adjective describing the situation, idea, or societal condition that George Orwell identified as being destructive to the welfare of a free and open society. It connotes an attitude and a brutal policy of draconian control by propaganda, surveillance, misinformation, denial of truth, and manipulation of the past, including the unperson — a person whose past existence is expunged from the public record and memory, practiced by modern repressive governments. Often, this includes the circumstances depicted in his novels, particularly We already have non-accountable surveillance both in form of cameras, mobility tracking and mass surveillance as revealed by the avalanche of revelations set in motion by Edward Snowden, and now we may add manipulation of the past. And the FCC has just allowed a fast lane, violating net neutrality. I am European born and bred and tend to see things in much more contrast and detail than most US and other global citizens. But there is a way out of the verdict and it involves novel use of linked data and semantic web technologies. In fact the European court has just handed Tim Berners-Lee the seed for an Internet bill of rights. The first search engine compay to comply and collaborate with this, almost certainly Google itself will set the tone and pace for change. Milton Ponson GSM: +297 747 8280 PO Box 1154, Oranjestad Aruba, Dutch Caribbean Project Paradigm: A structured approach to bringing the tools for sustainable development to all stakeholders worldwide by creating ICT tools for NGOs worldwide and: providing online access to web sites and repositories of data and information for sustainable development This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. On Friday, May 16, 2014 5:42 PM, Krzysztof Janowicz janow...@ucsb.edu wrote: Otherwise an Orwellian future looms at the horizon where history is conveniently rewritten in cases where for freedom of information reasons this obviously should NOT. I know that this is not the most productive way to address your email and start a discussion on an important topic; but, with all respect, your email is highly biased, does not well reflect the original intention of the court, and you may have to revisit Orwell's book (and what is typically meant by 'Orwellian'). Best, Krzysztof On 05/16/2014 01:09 PM, ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program wrote: The European Union Court has reached a verdict with a profound impact on the functioning of the Internet. See: http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?docid=152065mode=reqpageIndex=1dir=occ=first∂=1text=doclang=ENcid=34297 In essence when you Google your own name, the search results page is subject to European privacy laws which state that the individual whose name popped up has the right to correct or alter information appearing on the results page. Google by virtue of this verdict is now forced to create some mechanism to offer any European Union individual just that. Issues about verification of individual requesting removal set aside it also has profound implications about freedom of right issues. What about suspects in ongoing criminal or other court cases who would want to exercise their right innocent until proven guilty, which would obviously benefit all criminals and corrupt individuals. I think it is high time that the creators, maintainers and developers of the platforms which collectively form the Internet sit down with search engine companies and work out some practical rules to provide the option of the right to have some personal information forgotten, as stated in this European verdict feasible. Otherwise an Orwellian future looms at the horizon where history is conveniently rewritten in cases where for freedom of information reasons this obviously should NOT. Milton Ponson GSM: +297 747 8280 PO Box 1154, Oranjestad Aruba, Dutch Caribbean Project Paradigm: A structured approach to bringing the tools for sustainable development to all stakeholders worldwide by creating ICT tools for NGOs worldwide and: providing online access to web sites and repositories of data and information for sustainable development This email and any files
Re: European court reaches verdict with profound impact in Internet
Hello Milton, On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 05:41:49AM -0700, ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program wrote: My point of view is shared by most members of EDRI, the European Digital Rights platform. The important word is most here. And you too seem to agree that a right to be forgotten makes sense. Many people feel that Google has a responsibility although it would be extremely undesireable if Google becomes a ministry of forgetting. This should be solved as decentral as possible. And because of the European legalese the verdict will also apply generically to all other search engine companies. Of course it will. But there is a way out of the verdict and it involves novel use of linked data and semantic web technologies. I very much doubt that triples can help here. Regards, Michael Brunnbauer -- ++ Michael Brunnbauer ++ netEstate GmbH ++ Geisenhausener Straße 11a ++ 81379 München ++ Tel +49 89 32 19 77 80 ++ Fax +49 89 32 19 77 89 ++ E-Mail bru...@netestate.de ++ http://www.netestate.de/ ++ ++ Sitz: München, HRB Nr.142452 (Handelsregister B München) ++ USt-IdNr. DE221033342 ++ Geschäftsführer: Michael Brunnbauer, Franz Brunnbauer ++ Prokurist: Dipl. Kfm. (Univ.) Markus Hendel pgpCHDj8FnAL2.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: European court reaches verdict with profound impact in Internet
On Sat, 5/17/14, Michael Brunnbauer bru...@netestate.de wrote: But there is a way out of the verdict and it involves novel use of linked data and semantic web technologies. I very much doubt that triples can help here. = I agree, Michael, but would further like to point something out which is relavent to legal proceedings in the current age, and for evermore: Sometime in the late 1800's the ability of a practitioner of Natural Science disciplines to read everything ever published in that discipline was exceeded - long before any of us were born. When did this happen with the Law ? Never, of course, the Law is bemoaned as behind the times. When did this happen with Computer Science ? Never, of course, all Computer Science is cutting edge. Contempt of Microbiology is not an offense because Microbiology is not a legal argument. On the other hand, reckless handling of a pathogen contrary to accepted standards is an offense. The scope of the Search Engine business is Computer Science. To repeatedly make laughable legal argument about the Search Engine Business in vacuo is contempt for the Court and contempt for us all. Cheers, Gannon
Re: European court reaches verdict with profound impact in Internet
I agree with you on the right to be forgotten. Yet technically it would make more sense to create special tagging which would upon request of the individual and through an mediation process involving a national agency supervising digital rights and privacy to have search engines provide a (legal) update tag which states the nature and scope of the update. Google already has these tags in place when you mouse over the individual results. Now apply a semantic linked data process and any offending search result will yield this update. The key issue is that the individual involved will have to initiate an edit process. Thus we do NOT remove any results and do not change the past, we merely provide specific updates on possible offending results by the user. This removes the legal obligation from the search engine to do all the editing. The edits must be triggered by the individual in order to exercise his/her rights of privacy. This is in line with what we consider the trade off between the right of the individual to privacy and the right of the public to have access to information. We live in interesting times because the European Union just adopted the following; The Council adopts the Guidelines on Freedom of Expression online-offline Press release http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_Data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/142550.pdf EU Human Rights Guidelines on Freedom of Expression Online and Offline Document http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/142549.pdf These show the other side of the coin Milton Ponson GSM: +297 747 8280 PO Box 1154, Oranjestad Aruba, Dutch Caribbean Project Paradigm: A structured approach to bringing the tools for sustainable development to all stakeholders worldwide by creating ICT tools for NGOs worldwide and: providing online access to web sites and repositories of data and information for sustainable development This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. On Saturday, May 17, 2014 12:40 PM, Gannon Dick gannon_d...@yahoo.com wrote: On Sat, 5/17/14, Michael Brunnbauer bru...@netestate.de wrote: But there is a way out of the verdict and it involves novel use of linked data and semantic web technologies. I very much doubt that triples can help here. = I agree, Michael, but would further like to point something out which is relavent to legal proceedings in the current age, and for evermore: Sometime in the late 1800's the ability of a practitioner of Natural Science disciplines to read everything ever published in that discipline was exceeded - long before any of us were born. When did this happen with the Law ? Never, of course, the Law is bemoaned as behind the times. When did this happen with Computer Science ? Never, of course, all Computer Science is cutting edge. Contempt of Microbiology is not an offense because Microbiology is not a legal argument. On the other hand, reckless handling of a pathogen contrary to accepted standards is an offense. The scope of the Search Engine business is Computer Science. To repeatedly make laughable legal argument about the Search Engine Business in vacuo is contempt for the Court and contempt for us all. Cheers, Gannon
Re: European court reaches verdict with profound impact in Internet
IANAL but: Surely all Google, or any US search engine, would need to do is close down all local subsidiaries in states that are subject to the ECJ. EU member states would be free to attempt to block all access to google (or to refer the reasonableness of the preliminary ruling back to the ECJ; the explicit decision to allow the content provider to continue to serve the document at issue). Showing willingness to cut your population off from the big three search engines because the EU loves Spanish criminals would be an act of quite remarkable political courage in the week leading up to what could be the surliest European Parliamentary elections to date. If any litigant were to seek enforcement of a judgement of this kind against Google in California, I would expect to see summary judgement granted against them, as in the district court trial in LICRA v. Yahoo! ; the 9th circuit rulings against Yahoo! were based on ripeness, and the case was remanded for dismissal *without* prejudice.
Re: European court reaches verdict with profound impact in Internet
I think it is high time that the creators, maintainers and developers of the platforms which collectively form the Internet sit down with search engine companies and work out some practical rules to provide the option of the right to have some personal information forgotten, as stated in this European verdict feasible. I agree. If I had my say, this chat would would be decidedly less collegial than I think Milton has in mind though ... I would begin the conversation with: Look you creepy jerks, if you keep hoovering up personal information then you will force Courts to force you to flatten the semantics out of the Semantic Web rendering it inoperable. Stop it. Stop it right now. Gannon On Fri, 5/16/14, ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program metadataport...@yahoo.com wrote: Subject: European court reaches verdict with profound impact in Internet To: public-lod public-lod@w3.org, semantic-web semantic-...@w3.org Date: Friday, May 16, 2014, 3:09 PM The European Union Court has reached a verdict with a profound impact on the functioning of the Internet. See: http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?docid=152065mode=reqpageIndex=1dir=occ=firstpart=1text=doclang=ENcid=34297 In essence when you Google your own name, the search results page is subject to European privacy laws which state that the individual whose name popped up has the right to correct or alter information appearing on the results page. Google by virtue of this verdict is now forced to create some mechanism to offer any European Union individual just that. Issues about verification of individual requesting removal set aside it also has profound implications about freedom of right issues. What about suspects in ongoing criminal or other court cases who would want to exercise their right innocent until proven guilty, which would obviously benefit all criminals and corrupt individuals. I think it is high time that the creators, maintainers and developers of the platforms which collectively form the Internet sit down with search engine companies and work out some practical rules to provide the option of the right to have some personal information forgotten, as stated in this European verdict feasible. Otherwise an Orwellian future looms at the horizon where history is conveniently rewritten in cases where for freedom of information reasons this obviously should NOT. Milton Ponson GSM: +297 747 8280 PO Box 1154, Oranjestad Aruba, Dutch Caribbean Project Paradigm: A structured approach to bringing the tools for sustainable development to all stakeholders worldwide by creating ICT tools for NGOs worldwide and: providing online access to web sites and repositories of data and information for sustainable development This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.
Re: European court reaches verdict with profound impact in Internet
Otherwise an Orwellian future looms at the horizon where history is conveniently rewritten in cases where for freedom of information reasons this obviously should NOT. I know that this is not the most productive way to address your email and start a discussion on an important topic; but, with all respect, your email is highly biased, does not well reflect the original intention of the court, and you may have to revisit Orwell's book (and what is typically meant by 'Orwellian'). Best, Krzysztof On 05/16/2014 01:09 PM, ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program wrote: The European Union Court has reached a verdict with a profound impact on the functioning of the Internet. See: http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?docid=152065mode=reqpageIndex=1dir=occ=firstpart=1text=doclang=ENcid=34297 In essence when you Google your own name, the search results page is subject to European privacy laws which state that the individual whose name popped up has the right to correct or alter information appearing on the results page. Google by virtue of this verdict is now forced to create some mechanism to offer any European Union individual just that. Issues about verification of individual requesting removal set aside it also has profound implications about freedom of right issues. What about suspects in ongoing criminal or other court cases who would want to exercise their right innocent until proven guilty, which would obviously benefit all criminals and corrupt individuals. I think it is high time that the creators, maintainers and developers of the platforms which collectively form the Internet sit down with search engine companies and work out some practical rules to provide the option of the right to have some personal information forgotten, as stated in this European verdict feasible. Otherwise an Orwellian future looms at the horizon where history is conveniently rewritten in cases where for freedom of information reasons this obviously should NOT. Milton Ponson GSM: +297 747 8280 PO Box 1154, Oranjestad Aruba, Dutch Caribbean Project Paradigm: A structured approach to bringing the tools for sustainable development to all stakeholders worldwide by creating ICT tools for NGOs worldwide and: providing online access to web sites and repositories of data and information for sustainable development This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. -- Krzysztof Janowicz Geography Department, University of California, Santa Barbara 5806 Ellison Hall, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-4060 Email: j...@geog.ucsb.edu Webpage: http://geog.ucsb.edu/~jano/ Semantic Web Journal: http://www.semantic-web-journal.net
Re: European court reaches verdict with profound impact in Internet
hi all, http://www.internet-law.de/2014/05/the-ecj-is-right-the-result-is-wrong.html Regards, Michael Brunnbauer On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 01:09:54PM -0700, ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program wrote: The European Union Court has reached a verdict with a profound impact on the functioning of the Internet. See: http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?docid=152065mode=reqpageIndex=1dir=occ=firstpart=1text=doclang=ENcid=34297 In essence when you Google your own name, the search results page is subject to European privacy laws which state that the individual whose name popped up has the right to correct or alter information appearing on the results page. Google by virtue of this verdict is now forced to create some mechanism to offer any European Union individual just that. Issues about verification of individual requesting removal set aside it also has profound implications about freedom of right issues. What about suspects in ongoing criminal or other court cases who would want to exercise their right innocent until proven guilty, which would obviously benefit all criminals and corrupt individuals. I think it is high time that the creators, maintainers and developers of the platforms which collectively form the Internet sit down with search engine companies and work out some practical rules to provide the option of the right to have some personal information forgotten, as stated in this European verdict feasible. Otherwise an Orwellian future looms at the horizon where history is conveniently rewritten in cases where for freedom of information reasons this obviously should NOT. Milton Ponson GSM: +297 747 8280 PO Box 1154, Oranjestad Aruba, Dutch Caribbean Project Paradigm: A structured approach to bringing the tools for sustainable development to all stakeholders worldwide by creating ICT tools for NGOs worldwide and: providing online access to web sites and repositories of data and information for sustainable development This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. -- ++ Michael Brunnbauer ++ netEstate GmbH ++ Geisenhausener Straße 11a ++ 81379 München ++ Tel +49 89 32 19 77 80 ++ Fax +49 89 32 19 77 89 ++ E-Mail bru...@netestate.de ++ http://www.netestate.de/ ++ ++ Sitz: München, HRB Nr.142452 (Handelsregister B München) ++ USt-IdNr. DE221033342 ++ Geschäftsführer: Michael Brunnbauer, Franz Brunnbauer ++ Prokurist: Dipl. Kfm. (Univ.) Markus Hendel pgpkXFl5fH08k.pgp Description: PGP signature
