The Right to be Forgotten and Business Failures

In the digital age, a business’s past mistakes can linger online indefinitely, shaping public perception and hindering future opportunities. Whether it’s a bankruptcy filing, a scandal, or a string of negative reviews, the internet rarely forgets. However, emerging legal frameworks like the Right to be Forgotten (RTBF), paired with strategic online reputation management (ORM), offer businesses a path to recover from failure and rebuild trust. This article explores how combining digital erasure with proactive reputation strategies can help companies move beyond their past and create space for reinvention.

The numbers tell a clear story. After the right to be forgotten was introduced in the EU, over 386,000 requests flooded in within just 18 months. Many organizations admit they’re unprepared for the volume and complexity of these requests. As more people exercise their privacy rights businesses face real risks—financial, operational and legal—if they don’t get compliance right

Need help protecting your online reputation? Reach out to AGR Technology for a confidential consultation

Understanding the Right to Be Forgotten

Understanding the right to be forgotten requires recognizing its foundation as a legal right enabling individuals to request the erasure of personal data from digital platforms under specified conditions. The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) established this right across the EU, and the UK retained it post-Brexit. These regulations empower people to control or remove outdated, inaccurate, or unlawfully processed data from public digital records.

Businesses encounter this right primarily when individuals seek to erase references that no longer serve a legitimate business purpose or may damage their reputation, such as coverage of dissolved companies or past insolvencies. The principle obligates us, as data controllers, to respond to erasure requests if the data isn’t essential for compliance with legal obligations or necessary in legal proceedings.

The right to be forgotten doesn’t extend to all data types. It targets data that’s accessible through public search engines—like old news articles, searchable databases, or forum discussions about business failures—rather than confidential or internally stored information. This scope means requests focus on data visible to external users and not locked within internal business systems.

Exceptions limit the reach of erasure rights. We may refuse deletion requests if retaining information is vital for exercising freedom of expression, fulfilling statutory obligations, complying with legal orders, or defending against legal claims. These safeguards maintain a balance between privacy rights and other public interests.

Failing to act on valid erasure requests exposes businesses to significant risks. Penalties can include a fine from the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) in the UK, reputational damage, and potential litigation from affected individuals. In 2023, UK authorities issued penalties exceeding GBP 12 million for serious non-compliance cases.

Legal Framework and Global Application

Understanding the legal context surrounding the right to be forgotten and business failures helps businesses address removal requests efficiently and stay compliant across different regions. Regulations such as the GDPR and its local adaptations define how companies must handle personal data, including online traces of failed ventures.

Key Provisions Under the GDPR and Other Jurisdictions

The right to be forgotten and business failures intersect directly under Article 17 of the GDPR, which obligates organizations to erase personal data if that data is outdated, inaccurate, or processed unlawfully. We see this applied when individuals involved with failed companies, such as former directors or business owners, request the removal of negative search engine listings or online media.

Other global jurisdictions follow distinct rules. The UK retained the right to be forgotten post-Brexit, mirroring the EU’s approach. While Australia doesn’t grant a statutory right to be forgotten, mechanisms like content takedown requests and de-indexing help us address business failure references. In the United States, delisting and erasure options remain limited to specific legal contexts, often focused on defamation or privacy violations, so our strategies adapt in line with the local legal landscape.

Limitations and Exemptions

The right to be forgotten and business failures face important boundaries. Legal frameworks limit erasure in scenarios such as legal obligations, public interest, freedom of expression, or compliance with regulatory requirements. For instance, public records of insolvency or director disqualifications sometimes remain online if law mandates public accessibility.

We address only data that is no longer necessary, is proven inaccurate, was unlawfully processed, or has no overriding public benefit. If a business closure search result appears on private databases, and not in public search engines, erasure laws usually don’t apply. When protected journalistic or regulatory publication occurs, requests may be denied. Understanding these exceptions allows our approach to focus on compliant, context-driven solutions that avoid legal risk and maximize online reputation repair.

The Intersection of the Right to Be Forgotten and Business Failures

Business failures and online data intersect sharply around the right to be forgotten. When individuals face lasting digital records of insolvency, director disqualification or dissolved companies, compliance with erasure requests isn’t just a legal matter—it shapes corporate identity and operational risk.

Impact on Corporate Reputation and Legacy

Negative coverage of business failures recorded online can follow former directors or executives long after a company ceases operation. Press archives, insolvency lists and forum discussions remain indexable for years, amplifying past setbacks with every search. Unfavourable records may deter investors, partners or clients, undermining trust in new endeavors regardless of a business’s current stability.

Prompt, lawful handling of right to be forgotten requests demonstrates respect for privacy and accountability. When companies remove unnecessary, inaccurate or outdated data, they not only comply with GDPR mandates but also reduce the likelihood of reputational harm. Google’s removal of over 5 million links by 2024, for example, illustrates widespread reliance on data erasure to protect professional narratives and brand reputations in the wake of failures.

Challenges for Businesses Handling Erasure Requests

Handling right to be forgotten and business failures requests involves multiple legal and operational hurdles. Identifying all instances of outdated data requires technical, legal and communicative coordination. Requests tied to insolvencies or liquidations often span several public databases, news outlets and industry forums, increasing the complexity and time required to ensure full compliance.

Data controllers must weigh each request against exemptions, such as public interest or ongoing legal requirements. In some instances, local laws still mandate publication for insolvency records or director disqualifications.

Failing to process valid erasure requests exposes companies to recurring legal action, regulatory review and public scrutiny. Operational delays, insufficient data mapping or lack of internal expertise make businesses vulnerable. Protecting both privacy rights and organisational legitimacy depends on rigorous, documented handling of every right to be forgotten claim linked to business failures.

Ethical and Technical Considerations

Ethical and technical considerations shape how we address the right to be forgotten and business failures, especially where digital erasure involves sensitive historical business records.

Balancing Public Interest and Individual Privacy

Balancing public interest and individual privacy is a central ethical challenge as we manage erasure requests related to business failures. Restrictions arise where removing information could limit the public’s ability to assess risks, such as potential investor trust or patterns of corporate insolvency. European courts addressed this by limiting erasure only to searches within European domains, not globally, to protect transparency and accountability online. We weigh privacy rights against freedom of expression, regulatory obligations, and the community’s right to be informed when handling data removal involving director disqualifications or liquidation notices. Only non-essential, outdated, or inaccurate content relating to business failures qualifies for erasure, provided public interest and legal compliance constraints do not take precedence.

Overcoming Data Deletion Complexities

Overcoming data deletion complexities often requires layered technical strategies, due to dispersed and unknown data locations within digital infrastructures. Deletion requests must target all references within public, business, and backup databases for the affected individual or company, excluding protected or exempt records. Siloed legacy systems and incomplete indexing further complicate erasure, as does the need to differentiate between operational data and non-searchable archives. We rely on data mapping, content auditing, and coordinated processes to ensure effective removal or suppression of negative search results linked to past insolvencies or failed business ventures. Technical challenges, such as ensuring deletion across cloud, backup, and third-party platforms, are addressed by defined protocols and ongoing monitoring to prevent accidental reinstatement of erased data.

Future Implications for Businesses

Right to be forgotten and business failures drive significant change in digital risk management. Regulatory expectations intensify as authorities like the UK’s Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) increase enforcement on data erasure rights. Public data erasure requests have surged—Google alone processed over 5 million removal applications by 2024—demonstrating rising demand for online reputation protection and individual privacy.

Compliance infrastructure becomes essential for operational security. Organisations experience higher costs and complexity as right to be forgotten requests multiply, especially following widely publicised business failures.

Legal and financial risk expands if personal data linked to insolvent companies or failed directorships remains online without proper handling. Reputational harm can deter investment and limit new partnerships, making proactive compliance vital.

Business continuity planning incorporates data governance and digital content mapping. Automated systems, audit trails, and cross-department coordination reduce the threat of future non-compliance. Strategic investment in content management and technical removal capabilities lowers exposure to operational and legal challenges connected to erasure obligations.

Public expectation of digital privacy grows as the right to be forgotten becomes standard across jurisdictions. Businesses adapt by training staff in privacy protocols and integrating “privacy by design” into new projects. The digital footprint left by past business failures transforms from a persistent liability to a manageable aspect of brand reputation if organisations priotise timely, lawful content management.

Emerging technology, especially AI-driven content tracking, aids in identifying and suppressing outdated or inaccurate business data. Strategic implementation streamlines right to be forgotten compliance, limiting the negative impact of legacy failures while supporting regulatory alignment. Competitive advantage shifts toward those who proactively handle data erasure demands and maintain secure, compliant digital presence.

Conclusion

As digital privacy expectations continue to evolve businesses must treat the right to be forgotten as a core part of their risk management strategy. Adopting robust compliance processes and investing in the right technologies can help us navigate the complexities of data erasure requests tied to business failures.

By staying informed and proactive we not only safeguard your reputation but also strengthen trust with stakeholders. Prioritizing privacy and compliance today positions us to thrive in a landscape where digital accountability is more important than ever.

Need help protecting your online reputation? Reach out to AGR Technology for a confidential consultation

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the right to be forgotten?

The right to be forgotten is a legal right under the GDPR allowing individuals to request the deletion of their personal data from digital platforms, especially if the data is outdated, inaccurate, or unlawfully processed.

What types of data are covered under the right to be forgotten?

The right mainly applies to personal data that is publicly accessible and processed online, particularly when it is inaccurate, irrelevant, or unlawfully held. Certain legal and public interest exemptions exist.

How does the right to be forgotten impact businesses facing insolvencies or failures?

Negative digital records of business failures can harm a company’s reputation and future opportunities. Promptly handling erasure requests can help protect privacy rights and enhance corporate image.

How is the right to be forgotten enforced in other countries?

While the EU and UK have strong right to be forgotten laws, many countries like the US and Australia have different or less comprehensive approaches, often focusing on specific privacy or defamation remedies.

What technical challenges exist in deleting data under the right to be forgotten?

Data deletion can be complex, requiring advanced technical strategies, robust data mapping, and coordination across digital platforms to ensure comprehensive removal of personal information.

Can all negative online coverage about businesses be erased?

Not always. If the information serves the public interest, fulfills legal obligations, or is protected by journalistic or free speech rights, businesses may be required to retain certain data.

How should UK businesses prepare for right to be forgotten requests?

Businesses should implement clear data governance policies, train staff on privacy protocols, maintain updated data maps, and use technical solutions to respond efficiently to erasure requests, minimizing legal risks.

Note: The following content is not legal advice and is intended to be an informational resource for individuals wanting to learn more or request assistance with right to be forgotten requests.

Related content:

Online Reputation For Individuals

Online Reputation Management For High Net Worth Individuals

Removing Personal Divorce Records from Search Results

Reputation Management For AI platforms

Online Reputation Repair

Bibliography:

29 July 2024, st.adda247.com/https://www.studyiq.com/articles/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/29213454/Right-to-be-Forgotten-blog.png. Accessed 2 Aug. 2025.

(2014). Google flooded with ‘forgotten’ requests [Online]. SBS News. Available at: https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/google-flooded-with-forgotten-requests/3ajg8brt1 (Accessed: 2 August 2025).

Gibbs, Samuel. “Google to extend ‘right to be forgotten’ to all its domains accessed in EU” The Guardian, 11 Feb. 2016, www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/feb/11/google-extend-right-to-be-forgotten-googlecom. Accessed 2 Aug. 2025.