Google and the Right to be Forgotten, Four Case Studies – My Clean Slate

17 10 2018

When dealing with Google, it is good to bear in mind that their erasure policy is both erratic and random.  The Right to be Forgotten seems to depend on the individual who is dealing with a request and whether they have had a good or bad day.  There have been a number of odd – indeed, downright inconsistent decisions over the past six months which illustrate the problem. Learning on the job does not quite capture it. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law: Lloyd v Google, No compensation for Google data breaches – Rosalind English

13 10 2018

Most of us resignedly consent to the use of cookies in order to use internet sites, vaguely aware that these collect information about our browsing habits in order to target us with advertisements. It’s annoying, but does it do us any harm? That is the question that came up before Warby J in a preliminary application for a representative claim in the case of Lloyd v Google LLC [2018] EWHC 2599 (QB). Read the rest of this entry »





House of Lords Communications Committee Inquiry “The Internet: to regulate or not to regulate?”, An overview of the evidence, Part 1 – Oscar Davies

15 07 2018

The House of Lords Communications Committee has launched an inquiry into how the regulation of the internet should be improved.  Oral and Written evidence has been provided to the Committee by a very wide range of companies, NGOs and individuals from a variety of perspectives.   Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Australia, Trkulja v Google LLC, The return of Trkulja, Episode IV – Justin Castelan

27 06 2018

The Trkulja defamation franchise is into its fourth instalment, with the latest victory against the Google Empire coming with a stirring outcome arising from Mr Trkulja’s debut appearance in the High Court ([2018] HCA 25). Read the rest of this entry »





Google “Thumbs its Nose” at New Zealand’s Courts: Kiwis Should Look to Canada for a Precedent – Hugh Stephens

6 06 2018

Google is at it again. According to press reports in the New Zealand Herald, Google refused to comply with a New Zealand court order to suppress details and remove content related to a local murder trial because, according to a representative of Google NZ, “Google LLC, was a separate legal entity incorporated in the US, meaning New Zealand’s courts and laws held no power over it.” Tell that to the Supreme Court of Canada. Read the rest of this entry »





Is the Era of “Permissionless Innovation” and Avoidance of Regulation on the Internet Finally Over? It’s High Time – Hugh Stephens

16 05 2018

It would be the ultimate under-statement to say that recent events concerning the appalling breaches of privacy permitted and indeed orchestrated by Facebook have raised public awareness to new heights over what happens when internet intermediaries are allowed to do just about whatever they want. Read the rest of this entry »





Defamation take-down requests to Google – Max Campbell

12 05 2018

The right to be forgotten has been in the news again recently following the decision in NT1 & NT2 v Google LLC [2018] EWHC 799 (QB) (read our blog on that decision here), but Google will often voluntarily remove content from its search engine results on a variety of other grounds, including that the content is defamatory. Read the rest of this entry »