文献：Artur Strzelecki. Website removal from search engines due to copyright violation[J]. Aslib Journal of Information Management,2019,71(1).
Website removal from search engines due to copyright violation
Introduction
Many technology companies process vast amounts of data. These include online search engines, social networks, software-manufacturing companies, manufacturers of computer and mobile devices and providers of services available on the internet. Depending on the service(s) they provide, these companies may possess data concerning their users or the activities performed while taking advantage of the offered services.
Many of these large technology companies like Google[1], Facebook[2]; Microsoft[3], Twitter[4]; Apple[5]; LinkedIn[6], Snap[7], Pinterest[8], Dropbox[9], Cloudflare[10], Oath[11]publish transparency reports in which they reveal what actions they take concerning the processed data as well as who initiated these actions. Data published in transparency reports may be requested by government agencies from various countries, non-government organizations, companies or private entities.
Government agencies usually require technology companies to share data concerning specific users of the companyrsquo;s services or demand the removal of publicly available data. Data on such requests are usually published every six months and include the number of applications sent from a given country and the type of request, i.e., whether it is a request to share data or remove content. State institutions, courts and parties in civil cases often request usersrsquo; data from telecommunications and technical companies. National government bodies may ask technology companies to remove access to published content that, in their opinion, violates state legislation. Such applications are analyzed to determine whether the content actually violates the provisions of national law. If upheld, access to such content in a given country or territory is blocked. Some applications are justified on the grounds of defamation of character or other allegations, including violating local laws that prohibit the incitement of hatred or publishing adult-only contents. In such cases, the law differs in different countries. In their reports, companies present information concerning the number and type of requests they receive from government agencies. They publish the information in order to show the impact of government actions on users and the free flow of information on the internet.
Non-government organizations, companies and private entities usually send requests to remove publicly available content due to copyright violation. Types of content that may be subject to removal depend usually on the technology company and the manner in which it shares the data. In terms of search engines, search results for specific websites may be removed. For social networks, the types of content removed include individual posts, photos, videos, advertisements, profiles, accounts, sites, groups and events. For data-storage and data-sharing services, the types of content removed include stored text documents and graphic, audio or video files. A request sent by a copyright owner is usually processed by a team responsible for intellectual property and copyright. If the team determines that the application is complete and correct then the requested content is removed.
Private entities residing within the European Union and the European Economic Area may request the removal of data from a search engine in order to protect personal data. In May 2014 the Court of Justice of the European Union, when considering the case of a resident of Spain (Frantziou, 2014), Mario Costeja Gonzaacute;lez, against Google, determined that every private entity has the right to request that search engine operators such as Google or Bing remove search results including the name and surname of such an entity. The search enginersquo;s operator must comply with such a request if the links indicated in it lead to information which is improper, exaggerated, inadequate, or insignificant, taking into consideration the public interest, including such factors as the role of that person in public life. The links are removed only from results pertinent to the request, including the name and surname of that person. Concerning searches within the European Economic Area, URLs are removed from all European search results. With the use of geolocation, the access to URLs is restricted based on the country of the person requesting their removal. If a query in the form of a name and surname is entered into the search engine, then the following message is displayed below the search results: “Some results may have been removed under data protection law in Europe.”
Technology companies usually have forms available for requesting the removal of content. The forms are sent by government agencies, copyright owners and private entities that want to take advantage of the right to be forgotten. The form usually requires a declaration that the requestor is the owner of copyright or content or is the person whose data is being processed, as well details of from where the content should be removed, or stopped from being displayed in the case of search results. A request to remove content based on copyright violation should only be processed after receiving an official request form; however, in order to take advantage of the right to be forgotten, one has only to confirm onersquo;s identity with an appropriate identity document.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In the next section, a review of the relevant literature is undertaken. Then the context of study and study setup is described and, following this, the results are presented and discussed. Finally, conclusions are drawn.
Literature review
An analysis of the literature regarding search engines reveals two main fields. The first consists of research conduc
剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料
文献：Artur Strzelecki. Website removal from search engines due to copyright violation[J]. Aslib Journal of Information Management,2019,71(1).
Website removal from search engines due to copyright violation
Introduction
Many technology companies process vast amounts of data. These include online search engines, social networks, software-manufacturing companies, manufacturers of computer and mobile devices and providers of services available on the internet. Depending on the service(s) they provide, these companies may possess data concerning their users or the activities performed while taking advantage of the offered services.
Many of these large technology companies like Google[1], Facebook[2]; Microsoft[3], Twitter[4]; Apple[5]; LinkedIn[6], Snap[7], Pinterest[8], Dropbox[9], Cloudflare[10], Oath[11]publish transparency reports in which they reveal what actions they take concerning the processed data as well as who initiated these actions. Data published in transparency reports may be requested by government agencies from various countries, non-government organizations, companies or private entities.
Government agencies usually require technology companies to share data concerning specific users of the companyrsquo;s services or demand the removal of publicly available data. Data on such requests are usually published every six months and include the number of applications sent from a given country and the type of request, i.e., whether it is a request to share data or remove content. State institutions, courts and parties in civil cases often request usersrsquo; data from telecommunications and technical companies. National government bodies may ask technology companies to remove access to published content that, in their opinion, violates state legislation. Such applications are analyzed to determine whether the content actually violates the provisions of national law. If upheld, access to such content in a given country or territory is blocked. Some applications are justified on the grounds of defamation of character or other allegations, including violating local laws that prohibit the incitement of hatred or publishing adult-only contents. In such cases, the law differs in different countries. In their reports, companies present information concerning the number and type of requests they receive from government agencies. They publish the information in order to show the impact of government actions on users and the free flow of information on the internet.
Non-government organizations, companies and private entities usually send requests to remove publicly available content due to copyright violation. Types of content that may be subject to removal depend usually on the technology company and the manner in which it shares the data. In terms of search engines, search results for specific websites may be removed. For social networks, the types of content removed include individual posts, photos, videos, advertisements, profiles, accounts, sites, groups and events. For data-storage and data-sharing services, the types of content removed include stored text documents and graphic, audio or video files. A request sent by a copyright owner is usually processed by a team responsible for intellectual property and copyright. If the team determines that the application is complete and correct then the requested content is removed.
Private entities residing within the European Union and the European Economic Area may request the removal of data from a search engine in order to protect personal data. In May 2014 the Court of Justice of the European Union, when considering the case of a resident of Spain (Frantziou, 2014), Mario Costeja Gonzaacute;lez, against Google, determined that every private entity has the right to request that search engine operators such as Google or Bing remove search results including the name and surname of such an entity. The search enginersquo;s operator must comply with such a request if the links indicated in it lead to information which is improper, exaggerated, inadequate, or insignificant, taking into consideration the public interest, including such factors as the role of that person in public life. The links are removed only from results pertinent to the request, including the name and surname of that person. Concerning searches within the European Economic Area, URLs are removed from all European search results. With the use of geolocation, the access to URLs is restricted based on the country of the person requesting their removal. If a query in the form of a name and surname is entered into the search engine, then the following message is displayed below the search results: “Some results may have been removed under data protection law in Europe.”
Technology companies usually have forms available for requesting the removal of content. The forms are sent by government agencies, copyright owners and private entities that want to take advantage of the right to be forgotten. The form usually requires a declaration that the requestor is the owner of copyright or content or is the person whose data is being processed, as well details of from where the content should be removed, or stopped from being displayed in the case of search results. A request to remove content based on copyright violation should only be processed after receiving an official request form; however, in order to take advantage of the right to be forgotten, one has only to confirm onersquo;s identity with an appropriate identity document.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In the next section, a review of the relevant literature is undertaken. Then the context of study and study setup is described and, following this, the results are presented and discussed. Finally, conclusions are drawn.
Literature review
An analysis of the literature regarding search engines reveals two main fields. The first consists of research conduc
剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料
资料编号：[240051]，资料为PDF文档或Word文档，PDF文档可免费转换为Word
课题毕业论文、文献综述、任务书、外文翻译、程序设计、图纸设计等资料可联系客服协助查找。
