The right to oblivion

Google began to execute a decision of the European Court to protect personal information. In mid -May, the highest court of the European Union granted the lawsuit of the Spanish citizen Mario Kostya Gonzalez, who demanded to remove the reference to the personal data that compromise him, namely, the 1998 newspaper article. The article refers to the sale of real estate for debts belonging to Gonzalez. The plaintiff has long repaid this debt, and the article is still hanging on the Internet.

From now on, any user has the right to prohibit Google distribution of information that is not corresponding (or that has ceased to correspond to reality). For this purpose, the Google European sites are posted, which the user must fill out to demand the deletion of data about himself. In the first four days of work of the new service, the company received 41 thousand such requirements - about seven per minute.

At first, experts regarded the court decision as destructive for the Internet business. After all, all online commerce is built today on contextual advertising and the formation of the user consumer profile. This technology is continuously improved. If everyone will, at their discretion, delete the information unpleasant to him about himself, a reliable portrait will not work. But everything turned out to be not so scary. The information itself remains on those servers where it is posted - just Google excludes links to it from its answers to requests. In addition, the decision of the European Court does not operate in the United States, so a curious one can simply go to the American site of the search engine.

The court’s decision also has a special reservation: it does not protect the “right to oblivion” of public figures, information about whose personal life is of considerable public interest. As a result, we will probably encounter the so -called Streisand effect. In 2003, the Barbra Streisand movie star acquired a claim to the photographer, who posted on the Internet a photograph of her estates on the California coast. If only six people watched the picture before the lawsuit, then a month after filing a lawsuit - 420 thousand, not counting readers of many newspapers around the world who published a photograph.

The confidentiality of personal life comes to an end. We ourselves abandon it, getting acquainted with all new gadgets with functions that we do not suspect

The confidentiality of personal life comes to an end. We ourselves abandon it, getting acquainted with all new gadgets with functions that we do not suspect, posting on social networks photo reports about our travels and family events, filling out the profiles of the questionnaire about themselves and our tastes, participating for the sake of entertainment in tests and quizzes. Many are convinced that even through the webcam turned off, you can observe what is happening in our house. This is not to mention observation cameras in the streets, in stores and institutions, about various databases, where our names bring governments for their needs.

Do not flatter yourself with the thought that we are not involved in anything bad, and therefore we are not afraid of a big brother. Our actions can be interpreted, on the basis of available information, you can make a false picture of our behavior. Okay, but in our native Fatherland they will begin to become interested in, as described by Saltykov-Shchedrin: “Um ... So you deigned to visit Switzerland?-Would you go to the midwives?-WANIDED-SHOULD SHOULD IN THE PROBLEMING OF BAND?-Wine ..." Someone was already delayed at the entrance to Russia (it was under the entrance to Russia Entrance), incomprehensible people at the airport led strange conversations with those who have arrived, and all this happened after scanning their passports with a special device. And here is the concealment of dual citizenship, and now not only citizenship, but also a residence permit ... at least be afraid with such data, that our Crimea is from the title of the National Passner you will not be undermined.

The world is ruled by "Netocracy", Alexander Bard and Jan Zoderquist, an elite who has access to information, announced several years ago. In this new marvelous world, only the illusion of privacy remains. Fantast writer David Brin, who created the concept of a “transparent society,” believes that there is nothing wrong with this, since citizens of such a society enjoy the right to “reverse observation” of power. In its radical head, the theory claims that society will ultimately take control of information from the elite. In such a society, the right to privacy will seem to people an absurd prejudice. Probably, the authors of this utopia are very kind people, romantics who do not believe in the existence of malice, envy, hatred, thirst for power at all costs. They can be envied.

Vladimir Abarinov - Washington Observer Radio Liberty

Opinions expressed under the heading "Law" may not reflect the point of view of the editorial office