For almost fifty years, our system recognizes and protects the “right to be forgotten”, i.e. the right not to review news that was published and that could damage the honor or reputation of a person, without the occurrence of new events to justify a renewed interest in the news in question.

However, it may happen that a story, even if no longer current but maintaining a certain level of historical value, is reinserted in a database that is accessible to the public, such as a database of past editions of newspapers. With the increasing popularity of online publications, such phenomenon is definitely on the rise and has deserved a specific intervention by the Supreme Court. The latter, in its judgment no. 5525/12, said in this case that “there is a need, for the sake of the social identity that the [news] pertains to guarantee [the interested person] context and update of news and other information subsequently published concerning the evolution of the story [stored in the archive], which can complement or radically change the original framework described in the news, in particular when the facts are part of a court case [...].”

The purpose of this update of information is twofold: on the one hand, it allows users to have a complete view of the whole story, and, on the other hand, allows the protagonists of the news story to see the updates on news concerning them. The burden is therefore on the owners of the websites containing information, to ensure that the information stored and accessible by their users is always true and accurate, current and complete.