Skip to main content

Home/ opensociety/ Group items tagged Route

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Parycek

Der EuGH, Google und das Vergessen: Was sagt das Urteil wirklich? - 0 views

  • benfalls inexakt ist Mathias Müller von Blumencron, wenn er  ebenfalls in der FAZ schreibt, dass es nun „doch ein Recht auf Vergessen werden im Internet“ gibt. Nein: das gibt es nicht.
  • Dieses Recht des Einzelnen ist  abzuwägen gegenüber den wirtschaftlichen Interesse des Suchmaschinenbetreibers und „dem Interesse der breiten Öffentlichkeit daran, die Information bei einer anhand des Namens der betroffenen Person durchgeführten Suche zu finden“
  • utocomplete-Urteil des BGH keine Klagswelle gegen Google gegeben habe, wie die FAZ einen Anwalt zitiert.
  • ...7 more annotations...
  • atlicher Regulierung rief, begann eine doch bemerkenswerte Diskussion um die Rolle von Google in der Informationsgesellschaft. Überschriften wie „Angst vor Google“, „ Google ou  la route de la servitude“, „Warum wir Google fürchten” , „Die Google-Gefahr“, „Dark Google“ schafften ein Klima, in dem nur schwer sachlich argumentiert werden konnte.
  • Google neo-absolutistische Machtfülle vor und schrieb „[o]ur demands for self-determination are not easily extinguished.  We made Google, perhaps by loving it too much.”
  • chtung der Privatsphäre wies der EuGH Google an, erforderlichen Maßnahmen zu ergreifen, um bestimmte personenbezogene Daten aus dem Index der Suchmaschine zu entfernen und den „Zugang zu diesen Daten in Zukunft zu verhindern“
  • keine Daten verarbeiteten, da sie nicht zwischen personenbezogenen Daten und anderen Informationen unterschieden
  • und deshalb hätten Suchmaschinenbetreiber in ihrem „Verantwortungsbereich im Rahmen [ihrer] Befugnisse und Möglichkeiten“  dafür zu sorgen, dass grundrechtliche Garantien ihre volle Wirksamkeit entfalten können (Abs. 38).
  • Es reiche aus, wenn der Suchmaschinenbetreiber aus wirtschaftlichen Erwägungen eine Zweigniederlassung oder Tochtergesellschaft gegründet habe, „ deren Tätigkeit auf die Einwohner dieses Staates ausgerichtet“ sei
  • Suchmaschinenbetreiber dazu verpflichtet werden können, Links zu Webseiten Dritter mit Informationen zu einer bestimmten Person zu entfernen, auch wenn Name und Informationen auf dieser Webseite nicht vorher oder gleichzeitig gelöscht würden
thinkahol *

Nobody Can Predict The Moment Of Revolution ( Occupy Wall Street ) | Occupy P... - 0 views

  •  
    angella on September 27th, 2011 at 1:08 pm # Online Protest Your Voice Will Be Heard Right to political protest The right to political protest is protected by the Constitution. Section 17 of the Bill of Rights provides for rights to conduct peaceful and unarmed activities such as assembly, demonstrations, pickets and petitions. Political protest also involves imparting related information, and this right is guaranteed by the section regarding freedom of expression (Section 16 of the Bill of Rights). Although the right to political protest is protected by the Constitution, this right may be limited by principle. Activists must remember that none of the fundamental rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights are absolute. The Constitution gives government the power to limit these rights. Section 36 of the Bill, however, says the limitation of fundamental rights or freedoms must be reasonable and justifiable in an open and democratic society based on human dignity, equality and freedom. The Following Abstracts from the Bill of Rights Might Apply To Any On-Line Protest Section 15: Freedom of religion, belief and opinion Everyone has the right to believe or think what they want, even if their opinion is different to the government. Everyone has the right to practise the religion they choose. Government institutions, like schools, can follow religious practices (like having prayers in the morning) but this must be done fairly and people cannot be forced to attend them. A person can also get married under the laws of their religion. But these cannot go against the Bill of Rights. For example, a woman who marries according to customary law does not lose her rights of equality when she gets married. Section 16: Freedom of speech and expression Everyone has the right to say what they want, including the press and other media. Limiting this right There are certain kinds of speech that are not protected. These are: propaganda for war inciting (encouraging) people to u
thinkahol *

Washington Okays Attack on Unarmed US Gaza Flotilla Ship - 0 views

  •  
    The Obama administration appears to have given a green light to an Israeli attack on an unarmed flotilla carrying peace and human rights activists - including a vessel with 50 Americans on board - bound for the besieged Gaza Strip. At a press conference on June 24, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton criticized the flotilla organized by the Free Gaza Campaign by saying it would "provoke actions by entering into Israeli waters and creating a situation in which the Israelis have the right to defend themselves." Clinton did not explain why a country had "the right to defend themselves" against ships which are clearly no threat. Not only have organizers of the flotilla gone to great steps to ensure are there no weapons on board, the only cargo bound for Gaza on the US ship are letters of solidarity to the Palestinians in that besieged enclave who have suffered under devastating Israeli bombardments, a crippling blockade, and a right-wing Islamist government. Nor did Clinton explain why the State Department suddenly considers the Mediterranean Sea off the coast of the port of Gaza to be "Israeli waters," when the entire international community recognizes Israeli territorial waters as being well to the northeast of the ships' intended route.
1 - 4 of 4
Showing 20 items per page