Right to forget?

We will not repeat what has already been said about the draft law No. 804132-6 , better known as the law “on the right to oblivion”, suppose that a certain citizen of the Russian Federation found false information on the Internet, stocking up with all the necessary documents confirming his right and wants to restore the truth.

Open the bill (as amended, passed the third reading) and see if it will come out with something.

1) Article 2 (Law No. 149- “On Information, Information Technologies and on Information Protection”) shall be supplemented with clause 20 to read as follows:
“20) search engine is an information system that, upon request from a user, searches the Internet for information of specific content and provides the user with information about the site page index on the Internet for accessing the requested information located on Internet sites, belonging to other persons, with the exception of information systems used for the implementation of state and municipal functions, the provision of state and municipal services, as well as for the implementation of other public other powers established by federal laws. ”;

Very interesting definition. According to legislators, the search engine directly searches for information on the Internet when it receives a request. Such systems do exist, but it’s hard to imagine how much a query would be executed on Google or Yandex with this approach. As a rule, common search engines search the Internet on their own and provide links to previously found information on request. Accordingly, the first question - can the lawyers of search engines prove that the law does not apply to them?

Further more interesting. The search system should provide access to information located on sites, with the exception of sites “used for the implementation of state and municipal functions, the provision of state and municipal services, as well as for the exercise of other public authorities established by federal laws.” This passage is personally incomprehensible to me. The bill is unlikely to exclude all these sites from search results. Much more likely another option - the bill does not imply the right to oblivion for state systems! It will be possible to remove from the issue of false data that are only on the resources of companies and individuals.
')
And further. Search engines can provide access not to the Internet resources themselves, but to their saved copies. Judging by the wording of the definition of a search engine, it is not obliged to stop issuing the saved copies.

1. The search engine operator that advertises on the Internet, which is aimed at attracting the attention of consumers located in the Russian Federation, at the request of a citizen (individual) (hereinafter referred to as the applicant) is obliged to stop issuing information about the site page index on the Internet (hereinafter also referred to as reference), allowing access to information about the applicant distributed in violation of the legislation of the Russian Federation, which is unreliable and irrelevant, from rativshey for the applicant by virtue of subsequent events or the applicant's action, with the exception of information about events that contain signs of criminal offenses, the timing of attraction which does not expire for criminal liability, and information about the commission of a citizen of the crime for which has not been removed or not repaid a previous conviction.

Another weird item.

1. It turns out that if the search engine does not distribute advertising, then it is not obliged to stop issuing false information?
2. In the text of the article, the concepts of false and irrelevant information are not separated. Why it is impossible to delete the information on crimes if this information is false? Since false information about a criminal record or criminal offense should not be deleted, it is logical that such information will be used for compromise.
   

2. The applicant's request must contain:
1) surname, name, patronymic, passport details, contact information (telephone and (or) fax numbers, e-mail address, mailing address);
2) information about the applicant specified in part 1 of this article, the issuance of references to which is subject to termination;

It turns out that the applicant can only be an individual. False information about companies is not supposed to be deleted. Why?

4. Within ten working days of the receipt of the notification specified in paragraph 3 of this article, the applicant takes measures aimed at filling the missing information, elimination of inaccuracies and errors, and sends the specified information to the search system operator, as well as an identity document ( if necessary).

Full list of documents can be found here . In most cases, this passport or birth certificate. Are we invited to send your passport?

Also, what does “taking action” mean? If the applicant sent a request to a certain state structure - is that enough? It was quite enough to say that the applicant sends the specified information to the operator.

Another question is related to the specified response time. Knowing our bureaucracy, you can be sure that ten working days to gather the necessary information is extremely small (the applicant does not necessarily live in the place where you can quickly obtain the necessary supporting documents. Three days at least by registered mail the request will go to a certain service, at least three days back ... Knowing our deadlines for mail delivery, you can be sure that we will not keep within 10 days).

5. Within ten working days of receipt of the applicant’s request or information specified by the applicant (in the case of sending the notification specified in paragraph 3 of this article to the applicant), the search engine operator is obliged to stop issuing references to the information specified in the applicant’s request when the search results for requests from search engine users containing the applicant's name and (or) last name, notify the applicant or send a reasoned refusal to the applicant.

Contradiction with the previously written in the bill. In this paragraph, the operator is obliged to stop issuing to any resources, but previously it was not necessary to stop issuing information on crimes and information placed on state and municipal resources.

Submit to the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation (Collection of Legislation of the Russian Federation, 2002,
No. 46, art. 4532; 2012, № 7, p. 784; 2013, No. 19, Art. 2326) the following changes:
2) in the third part of Article 402:
a) clause 2 shall be supplemented with the words “and (or) distributes advertising in the information and telecommunication network“ Internet ”aimed at attracting the attention of consumers located in the territory of the Russian Federation”;

In this regard, this paragraph of the code will be as follows:

3. The courts in the Russian Federation may also consider cases involving foreign persons in the event that:
2) the defendant has property located in the territory of the Russian Federation and (or) distributes advertising in the Internet information and telecommunications network, aimed at attracting the attention of consumers located in the territory of the Russian Federation;

Which of the famous search engines do not indulge in advertising? Thus, the search engine, even without having property in the territory of the Russian Federation, will fall under the law.

The first draft of the bill also required the deletion of data on events that took place more than three years ago.

2) reliable information about events that took place and ended more than three years ago, with the exception of information on events containing signs of criminal acts, the terms of which are not subject to criminal liability, as well as information on the crime committed by a citizen; or the conviction has not been paid;

Vigorous action by the Internet community has removed this requirement. Victory? Let's look at 152-FZ:

the processing of personal data should ensure the accuracy of personal data, its sufficiency, and, if necessary, its relevance to the purposes of processing personal data. The operator must take the necessary measures or ensure that they are taken to remove or clarify incomplete or inaccurate data. The storage of personal data must be carried out ... not longer than the purpose of processing personal data requires ... The processed personal data must be destroyed or depersonalized upon reaching the processing objectives or in case of loss of the need to achieve these goals, unless otherwise provided by federal law

The connection with the repealed clause of the draft law is remote, but knowing the practice of enforcing blocking sites, you can be sure that the requirement of compliance with relevance and the loss of necessity can well be applied to any personal data operator.

Are search engines subject to the requirements of the Personal Data Act? Obviously, yes, since at least they provide a display of saved pages. Can they do it? Obviously not, since they cannot have knowledge of the relevance of the data. Nevertheless, the law is the law, and any operator must, at the request of the personal data subject, remove irrelevant data or data whose display has become unnecessary. And there is no statute of limitations under this federal law.

Let's sum up:

1. The bill does not imply the removal of references to false information about companies and organizations;
2. The definition of a search engine is not correct;
3. Reading the definition of a search engine does not require you to remove references to false information posted on state and municipal resources;
4. Reading the definition of a search engine does not require removing the link to saved copies of Internet resources from the output;
5. The bill does not require the removal of references to false criminal data;
6. Remove links to false data are required only search engine operators that distribute advertising. Thus, the systems created in the framework of social and state projects may well go beyond the requirements of the law;
7. To confirm their claims, the claimant may be required to send proof of identity.
   

The conclusion may or may not under these conditions, the applicant remove the false information do ourselves.