It might be expected. The right to oblivion imposed by European justice Google already leads to issues of censorship. In the 70,000 links already cleared by the search engine, an individual begins to be talked about.
Google has indeed removed a 2007 blog post written by a BBC journalist, dealing with the departure of Stanley O'Neil, former CEO of Merrill Lynch investment bank involved in the subprime crisis.
The author cries of censorship, saying that the paper does not fall under the right to be forgotten, namely the ability to de-index the search results on persons perceived as inappropriate, irrelevant or n ' appear more relevant.
"Most people would argue that it is very appropriate in contrast to know the history, good or bad, officer," argues Robert Preston, the author of the article.
And to question the origin of the request for withdrawal which he does not come from the individual. This is contrary to the rules set by Google since only the person can enter the engine.
In Britain, politicians are starting to worry. "The decision of Justice may (...) turn millions of people into arbitrary censors - and a boon for scoundrels and crooks who want to erase their past embarrassing" ton Dominic Raab, a Conservative MP, quoted by La Tribune .
Examples of this type may well multiply. In France Repoters Without Borders has expressed its concerns and legal experts and SEO wonder.
"This is a real headache for search engines that will determine, case by case and in accordance with the decision of the ECJ, if the data of Internet users are" inadequate, or no longer relevant or excessive regard to the purposes of the treatment in question "to apply the right to be forgotten," worries the firm Franklin lawyers.
He continued: "The number of trials worldwide, could explode in order to interpret the rules enacted by the extremely vague CJEU US will be tempted to invoke the particular expression and press freedoms enshrined. by the First Amendment to the US Constitution to defeat the right to be forgotten ".
"We must expect an immediate reaction from advocates of total freedom of expression on the internet that will be willing to duplicate the information deleted from the index of search engines on other web sites."
"What will Google case of homonymous How the Criminal tie John Smith John Smith the good father? Who will occupy the Google results? And above all, how Google will know that he is the John Smith makes the removal request? "asks his side Girin Bertrand, CEO of VIP Reputation, a French e-reputation agency.