[Advocacy Advisors] Transparency and "right to be forgotten" notices from search engines

[Nathan]

Thanks very much for this, Stephen and the legal team. I especially
appreciate that the WMF has decided to make public the specific
notifications of the use of the "Right to be forgotten" in the EU.[1] It's
interesting that the bulk of the suppression requests have come from a
single (ex?) Wikimedian targeting internal process pages of his home wiki.
Not shockingly, the RtF request is now in the top 5 results on a Google
search of that persons name.

The NY Times covered the transparency report:
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/08/06/wikipedia-details-government-data-requests/?src=twr

[1]:
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Notices_received_from_search_engines


On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 6:15 AM, Stephen LaPorte <slaporte at wikimedia.org>
wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> The “right to be forgotten” has been the subject of much discussion and
> debate (including on this list),[1] particularly following the May European
> Court of Justice judgment ordering Google to delist some links related to a
> Spanish citizen.[2] Since then, search engines have been receiving requests
> to remove hundreds of thousands of URLs from search results. Google
> recently released more information about its right to be forgotten
> requests.[3]
>
> The WMF legal team has been watching the “right to be forgotten” issue
> closely and considering what legal strategies we should take going forward.
> Today, the WMF published its first transparency report[4]—you can read more
> in this blog post.[5] WMF held a press briefing announcing our strategy of
> advocacy and transparency on link censorship. We will oppose what we see as
> a misguided court decision that has resulted in a crude implementation of
> the “right to be forgotten.” Lila has also issued a statement,[6] and,
> Geoff, WMF’s general counsel, and Michelle Paulson, WMF's legal counsel,
> have published a blog on the subject.[7] As the topic is of interest to
> this group, we wanted to keep you informed of these recent legal
> developments.
>
> Thanks,
> Stephen
>
> [1]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/advocacy_advisors/2014-June/000547.html,
>
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/advocacy_advisors/2014-June/000539.html
> [2] http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:62012CJ0131
> [3]
> https://docs.google.com/a/wikimedia.org/file/d/0B8syaai6SSfiT0EwRUFyOENqR3M/edit
> [4] http://transparency.wikimedia.org/
> [5]
> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/06/wikimedia-foundation-releases-first-transparency-report/
> [6]
> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/06/european-court-decision-punches-holes-in-free-knowledge/
>  [7]
> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/08/06/wikipedia-pages-censored-in-european-search-results/
>
> --
> Stephen LaPorte
> Legal Counsel
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
> *NOTICE: As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal and
> ethical reasons, I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for,
> community members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity.
> For more on what this means, please see our legal disclaimer
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Legal_Disclaimer>.*
>
> _______________________________________________
> Advocacy_Advisors mailing list
> Advocacy_Advisors at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/advocacy_advisors/attachments/20140806/fc0e2e00/attachment.html>