Business

Policy

Info Commissioner tears into Google's 'call us journalists' trial defence

No wriggling out of regulation, snarls ICO chief

By Gareth Corfield

33 SHARE

RTBF Trial UK Information Commissioner Elizabeth Denham has declared war on Google, urging the High Court to throw out the ad biz's defences in the Right To Be Forgotten trial because they are "impermissibly broad".

"If Google were right in its approach to the concept of 'journalism', that would yield a result whereby the commissioner would in practice be stripped of any effective regulatory powers in respect of Google's search operations," thundered Denham, whose written submission to the court was prepared by barristers Anya Proops QC and Rupert Paines.

The ongoing Right To Be Forgotten trial features two people, referred to publicly as NT1 and NT2, who have made a legal first by taking Google to court in London over their data protection rights. The Information Commissioner was granted permission to intervene in NT1's case by trial judge Mr Justice Warby.

Denham's submissions were adopted by NT1's barrister, Hugh Tomlinson QC, who explicitly referred to them in his closing speech to the court yesterday, saying:

"We do say this is not journalism, not within the journalistic exemption. The submissions are made in paragraph 26 of the ICO's submissions."

Does Parliament or Google decide when your criminal past is forgotten?

READ MORE

Among other things, Google claims that its search results ought to benefit from the journalism exemption to EU data protection laws. Though its barrister, Antony White QC, acknowledged that the EU court decision that created the right to be forgotten explicitly said that journalism "does not appear to be... [what data] processing carried out by the operator of a search engine" falls under, in legal terms White argued that that court did not rule it out completely.

This argument enraged the ICO, which said in the submission: "The concept of 'journalism' presupposes a process by which content is published to an audience pursuant to the taking of human editorial decisions as to the substantive nature and extent of that content."

In plain English, humans (mostly) don't decide what appears in search results so calling Google's activities "journalism" is just plain wrong, according to the commissioner.

"In effect," she continued, if the High Court accepted Google's argument and let it be protected by the journalism exemption, the ad-supported firm "would be able to operate the right to be forgotten regime almost entirely free from regulatory oversight and control".

Denham has also set out her stall against social media companies, telling Parliament during a hearing yesterday that "nobody is making the argument any more that these are benign platforms". ®

Sign up to our NewsletterGet IT in your inbox daily

33 Comments

More from The Register

Neil Young slams Google, after you log in to read his rant with Google or Facebook

Heart Of Gold meets Piece Of Crap

Google to build private trans-Atlantic cable from US to France

Bandwidth is better, down where it's wetter, take it from me!

Ex-Intel exec Diane Bryant exits Google cloud

Could Chipzilla replace Brian with a Bryant?

Google cuts price of cloudy interconnects from partners

If you can't get to a POP yourself, this plan's for you

Google kills AdWords!

LOGOWATCH Don’t pop the champagne – it’s just a rebrand with some AI pixie dust

Facebook, Google, Microsoft, Twitter make it easier to download your info and upload to, er, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, Twitter etc...

GDPR put a gun to their heads

Google Cloud CEO admits: Yeah, we wanted GitHub too. Whatevs

'I really hope Microsoft can keep them totally neutral.' Haha

Google-free Android kit tipped to sell buckets

China, you see, has its own chocolate factories

Google freezes Android P: Get your shoes on, tire-kicking devs

Final 'droid P APIs, latest system images

Google's cuddling up to China with clouds in its eyes – reports

Drive and Docs may end up in Tencent-owned DCs