Our story begins in the Voronezh region. The doctor diagnostic center learned that the Internet is a website about doctors and it posted to her profile. Physician profile reviewed. It was completely laid out her personal information – name, title, place of work (she did the ultrasound for pregnant women). And under the profile read about yourself, which is a very bad doctor. The doctor asked to remove defamatory information from its website, but it did not happen. Then the citizen went to court.
the Supreme court has explained, how to get retirement savings of a deceased
the court found that the website, which offended the doctor, registered as mass media. It hosts more than a thousand reviews on 636 250 doctors working in the region. Each medic on the website a separate profile showing all of his personal data, place of work and position. Under this information, patients can write their opinion about the doctor. What they do not neglect.
Still, the court found that the data about the name of doctor and place of work site owners have to embed the profile from the official site of medical center. There was posted reviews.
as for our heroine, among the reviews about her work, two positive and the same negative. The latter authors did not suit made by doctor’s certificate.
His anguish the plaintiff was estimated at 150 thousand rubles. Her main argument was profile on the website, where “anyone can anonymously post their subjective, including negative judgments about her and her professional activities”, created without her consent. The plaintiff convinced the judge that reviews before posting in the profile are not checked. And it violates her right to privacy.
the owner of the site, it the defendant at the trial, denied all charges.
According to him, reviews are edited and placed only under the condition that the author confirmed the doctor’s visit card or medical documents. And the side of the defendants stated that the plaintiff, demanding removal of negative reviews, want to hide our professional mistakes.
Another of the arguments of the defendant – website is neither a directory nor a directory. He’s a mass medium. The information in it is the result of journalistic activities.
the Right to privacy and the information can compete. Important the balance between them
Local courts have unanimously sided with the defendant. The first instance decided that the information about the doctor is not to cause the doctor harm, and in order to “reach the public with objective information on medical services”.
According to the Voronezh regional court, process publicly available personal data without the consent of the data subject. And if you go on about the plaintiff, it “could interfere with legitimate activities of the media.”
Supreme court explained the rules of the house section with additions after divorce
a Woman doctor challenged the position of the Voronezh courts in the Supreme court of the Russian Federation. A dispute there studied, and the high court sided with the doctor. In the opinion of the Judicial Board on civil cases of the Supreme court, the parties argue about the right of the plaintiff to the inviolability of its private life and the right of the defendant to disseminate information with the use of personal data.
that said, in its decision, the Supreme court, the right to privacy and the right to disseminating information can compete, so between them need to find a balance.
In the opinion of the high court, local courts requiressmiling to analyse the importance of information to society, the degree of fame of a person, his previous behavior, to determine the content, form and consequences of the published information, the method of obtaining information and its accuracy.
And that, in the opinion of the Judicial Board on civil cases of the Supreme court of the Russian Federation, Voronezh for some reason the courts did not. They are not assessed social significance of the figure of the physician – whether it is a person holding state or municipal office, or plays a significant role in public life. In addition, the local courts did not assess the arguments of the parties. So, the doctor said that the defamatory information is not checked, and the site is a directory of the Voronezh doctors. The defendant claimed that his site is a mass medium and that a negative content before posting on the website is always checked.
In the end, the Supreme court ordered based on their clarifications of the dispute to be considered afresh.
the Supreme court has explained, than a car theft different from theft
This decision also shows that the audience of the review sites growing rapidly and their contents is in need of serious analysis. Of course, you can force the website to remove the negative opinion through the courts, especially if it is anonymous or contains insults. It is appropriate to talk about protection of honor and dignity. Such issues the courts are already successfully solved. But this is one side of the issue. But if we are talking about the use of personal data?
If the company or individual has published personal data on the Internet – it does not mean that they can be freely used. Personal data must be processed in a lawful manner, for specific, explicit, and legitimate purposes. It is said in the Law “On personal data”.
Can stille sites use information from web pages about people and organizations? And this information can be used freely?
Today, according to the law, many organizations have placed their information about their employees. Doctors in this list is no exception. If some organization pursuant to the requirements of the law publishes information about its employees on the website, it does not mean that you have to copy, create profiles and collect under them.