Need a Rewrite on case study 8 business policy

1

Name:	Ellington David
Assignment:	Case 8: Google and the Right to Be Forgotten (Privacy)
Date Submitted:	March 21, 2020
Course (include the section number):	MG495 Business Policy
Statement of Academic Integrity: I certify that: 1. I prepared this document specifically for this class; 2. I am the author of this document; 3. I am fully disclosing and giving proper credit to any outside assistance received in its preparation; 4. I cited sources of information (e.g., data, ideas, charts, etc.) and used this material to support this document. 5. I did not receive any assistance / help / guidance from others.
Student’s Signature (type your full name):	David Eugene Ellington

Case 8: Google and the Right to Be Forgotten (Privacy)

Ellington David

Park University

Executive Summary

Synopsis of the Case

In the case “Google and the Right to be Forgotten”, Mario Costeja Gonzales, a Spanish lawyer, in 2010, filed a complaint against a local Spanish newspaper, Google Spain and Google Inc. that violated his privacy rights. When his name was searched on the Internet, Google presented a 1998 newspaper article, La Vanguardia, where it was saying that Mario González was in financial trouble at the time. “Costeja immediately realized that this information could damage his reputation as an attorney” (Clark, 2018), and requested Google to delete the article or remove his personal data from the article, because his debts had been settled for years. So, Mario González contacted the Spanish data protection authority (DPA) to open a lawsuit against the company, since they said the information was published legally and from public record.

Relevant Factual Information about the Problem the Organization Faced

Mario Costeja contacted the Spanish Data Protection Agency (SDPA) to assist in his lawsuit against Google Inc. Mario's demands related to the right to be forgotten and his right to privacy. He made two requests, that La Vanguardia newspaper remove the article or change the page of his personal data, and that Google Inc. remove his personal data, so that it no longer appears on the internet. The request against La Vanguardia was dismissed, as the article was published legally. Although, Google was ordered to remove Costeja's personal data, with the SDPA deciding that Google should take responsibility as the "data controller" for its content. Google filed an appeal, taking the case to the European Court of Justice. Google argued that the controller of the published data should be the publisher of the information, not the search engine. The Court ruled against Google in 2014, saying that Google was allowing access to information that would not be accessible without using the search engine, thus causing Google to remove Costeja's information from the search results, which meant only a reduction in accessibility, since the information remained available on the original site it came from.

Explanation of Relevant Concepts, Theories and Applications

The European court confirmed the "right to be forgotten" in the Costeja v. Google and said the company, Google, that when a member of the public requests the removal of their personal data that is considered inappropriate or no longer relevant, Google should delete it from its search result.

Mario Costeja said that the issue of his debts in his past had already been resolved and he shouldn't and did not want to be linked to that issue whenever his name was searched on Google, as it goes against his legal rights. Costeja was fighting for his legal rights, with the removal of his personal data being his right.

Since the EU data protection laws, European court judges have decided that Google should delete links related to Mario Costeja Gonzales' personal data from the search engine that link the pages of the Spanish newspaper La Vanguardia's website. La Vanguardia does not need to remove the article, since it was published legally, however the Google search engine must remove the links from Costeja's data.

Recommendations

For Google to protect its worldwide business, they must follow to the EU court's ruling. Also, to avoid those kinds of problems in the future the company should take some measures, such as, Google implementing a very good and efficient system that filters information to prevent people from inadequate content online. This is a system where you can look an individual’s permission categorically before associating his or her content to different websites in the internet, avoiding breaking any legal rights.

Alternative Recommendations

An alternative recommendation to Google, that would take more time and maybe be not so much helpful, would be to continue appealing to the EU courts to claim no responsibility for how their data gets in the internet and is used. This might be a hard battle to fight again but in the end, it would bring back their credibility since they are the data collectors, not the ones who originally wrote the article. Google is a source for newspapers to use to spread their information and this case caused Google to suffer and take responsibility for a Spanish local new source.

Conclusion

The case “Google and the Right to be Forgotten” shows a difficult situation for Google. Not only Spain, but many countries around the world, can start critiquing Google for a better and more efficient responsibility with their data controller, so Google will have a better protection of their online content. Due to these issues in the past, people might be hesitant to use this search engine which in the end could lose market share for Google. To prevent this from happening, Google should reestablish their data policies to make sure privacy rights are the main focus and protecting people’s information. “Costeja González won his fight for a right to be forgotten, or at least to disappear. Unfortunately for him, the fight was pretty damn memorable” (Ball, 2014), as the whole world started to talk about his case, but one of the biggest reasons he wanted his personal data deleted from the internet, was because he did not want that information about his past to get public in the current days.

References:

Ball, J. (2014, May 14). Costeja González and a memorable fight for the 'right to be forgotten'. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/world/blog/2014/may/14/mario-costeja-gonzalez-fight-right-forgotten

Clark, C. (2018). Case 8: Google and the Right to Be Forgotten (Privacy), in Strategic Management and Business Policy: Globalization, Innovation, and Sustainability (14th ed.). NJ: Pearson Education.

Wheelen, T. L., Hunger, D. J., Hoffman, A. N., & Bamford, C. E. (2018). Strategic management and business policy: globalization, innovation and sustainability. Harlow, England: Pearson.