The court also finds against the Background of the in may 2018, which entered into force data protection regulation of the EU, as in other cases previously, that it arrives at the question of what are allowed to display search engines, on a case-by-case examination, on the balance between personality rights and the right to information of the press and the Public. The fundamental rights were not to be weighed "on an equal footing with each other", a "presumption of the primacy of the protection of the interests of the person Concerned," there is.
This is important. The Supreme court would have decided differently, would he freedom of the press to the grave, and anyone who for any reason do not like might leave, what's his name from Google, the flow of information. Not quite clear, however, what the Supreme court means by the phrase that a search engine provider "needs to not only take action, if he's of a more evident and clear at first glance recognizable violation of the law of the person Concerned acquires knowledge". When and how, exactly, Google needs to be active?Updated Date: 27 July 2020, 21:20