di Massimo Pellingra Contino
La domanda di pronuncia pregiudiziale alla base della sentenza verte sull’interpretazione degli articoli 2, lettere b) e d), 4, paragrafo 1, lettere a) e c), 12, lettera b), e 14, primo comma, lettera a), della direttiva 95/46/CE del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, del 24 ottobre 1995, relativa alla tutela delle persone fisiche con riguardo al trattamento dei dati personali, nonché alla libera circolazione di tali dati, nonché dell’articolo 8 della Carta dei diritti fondamentali dell’Unione europea.
Abstract
The decision of the Court of Justice of May 13, 2014 plays an important role in the landscape of European case law. Everyone has “the right to be forgotten”, and therefore may require search engines to remove personal information (including third parties) relating to him and that are deemed “inappropriate, irrelevant or no longer relevant”. Remains the conflict between the right to be forgotten, and the right to know! If a search engine decides not to remove content, the user can directly address the Court. Today is fully part of human rights law the right to oblivion digital result of a judgment of the European Court which completes the journey of a controversial law on the subject. Google has prepared a form that users can fill out online to request the removal of any reference to their data, through the evaluation of each request in order to balance the privacy rights of the person with the right of all to know and distribute information. Around the corner there are great risks for freedom of expression and the right to information. Maybe we need a clarification from the European Court in order to define the relationship between the right to information and right to be forgotten?