Complete guide: How to get content that violates your personal rights deindexed from Google and Bing
- Admin
- Dec 11, 2025
- 8 min read
When malicious content targets you – a post containing your personal data, doxxing, defamation, false accusations, or any other serious breach of your privacy – it is essential to understand a simple principle: as long as Google and Bing index that content, it continues to exist in the eyes of the world.
It is estimated that removing content from Google eliminates approximately 80% of the problem. Global visibility relies heavily on this search engine.
By also acting on Bing, you eliminate approximately 19% more exposure.
Together, these steps massively reduce the impact of harmful content and cut the ground out from under your harassers: they will have worked for nothing.
Of course, Google and Bing are just search engines. They don't delete the content on the original site; they simply remove it from the search results.
Ultimately, you will always need to supplement your approach with a direct request to the site that is broadcasting the infringement – we have also dedicated a complete guide to these actions: Doxxing, defamation, harassment: your rights and the means to defend yourself .
But let's focus here on deindexing.
Understanding the steps to take with Google
Google provides several forms, each corresponding to a different legal framework. This often leads to confusion for victims: which one should they use? Why do some work better than others? Why does Google so often reject legitimate requests?
The first thing to know is that Google rejects about 80% of takedown requests — even when lawyers are involved, even when the infringements are obvious.
This staggering rejection rate is no accident: Google's business model relies on the retention and exploitation of data. The company systematically invokes the "public data" argument, claiming that certain information cannot be removed if it is available somewhere on the internet.
This argument, however, goes against the official position of the CNIL, which recalls that any data allowing the identification of a person – even public data – can be subject to the right to erasure, as soon as it causes harm or violates your rights.
Google has a GDPR opt-out form for Europe, but it's far from ideal: it only removes results visible from within the European Union. In practice, this gives a false sense of security, but the results remain visible to the rest of the world. In other words, you think you're protected, but a simple VPN completely bypasses this "removal." For victims of harassment, this form is therefore insufficient.
The two truly effective forms are those dedicated to doxxing and the one based on the DMCA.
The doxxing form allows you to report the dissemination of sensitive personal data: telephone number, address, documents, elements allowing you to be identified or located, or content published with a clear intention to harm.
The second tool is the DMCA form, which is used when your photos, texts, or personal creations are stolen and reused without your permission. Many people are unaware that even your selfies or personal images fall under copyright law, giving you a very powerful legal weapon.
DMCA link (Google):https://reportcontent.google.com/form/dmca_search
Despite all these tools, Google remains extremely difficult to convince.
The most well-known example is that of a Canadian real estate agent, wrongly accused of pedophilia, who spent fifteen years trying to have this false information removed. Google ignored all his requests, until he was ordered to pay over $500,000 in damages.
Full article here: https://www.androidheadlines.com/2023/04/google-500000-fine-defamation-damage.html
And despite this exemplary conviction, the company has changed virtually nothing in its practices.
So how do we get out of this?
The key is perseverance. A request rejected today may be accepted tomorrow by another moderator, for no apparent reason.
We've handled numerous cases where Google rejected submissions four, five, even ten times in a row… then suddenly agreed to deindex. Therefore, it's crucial to keep every proof of submission, every response, every case reference.
An accumulation of complaints creates a history demonstrating your good faith and determination.
If Google persists in refusing despite clear violations, you can contact the public prosecutor to obtain a court order for deindexing, or even damages. This requires thorough documentation of the harm, but it is a perfectly legitimate course of action. We regularly assist victims in this regard.
The role of the DMCA: a little-known but extremely powerful tool
The DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) is a US law that allows anyone to request the removal of content that infringes their copyright. This law is often associated with artists or cultural works, but it also applies to personal photos, screenshots, texts, videos, or any content you have created.
In a doxxing case, it's common for your photos or private documents to be reused without your consent. The DMCA is then a quick and very effective way to get them removed from search results – sometimes even faster than filing the doxxing form itself.
Google takes DMCA takers much more seriously, as abuse on its part could lead to direct legal sanctions in the United States. That's why we advise never to overlook this possibility.
Bing: a quieter, but often more cooperative search engine
Unlike Google, Bing is much more humane and compassionate in handling complaints. The procedures may seem more technical, but the platform accepts the vast majority of requests, provided they are well-reasoned.
DMCA forms and sensitive content reports work particularly well. Once your request is processed, the effect is often rapid: the offending link disappears almost immediately.
Don't underestimate the importance of also addressing Bing. Once Google is cleaned up, this search engine represents the majority of the remaining exposure. Cleaning it up allows you to truly close the door.
To face the situation morally and regain power
It's normal to feel exhausted, humiliated, or helpless. Online harassment creates a feeling of injustice and powerlessness, but the truth is that you have rights, and legal recourse exists. The people who post this content are trying to isolate you, to make you believe that nothing can be done. This isn't true. Every report, every request sent, every recorded refusal is a step toward regaining control.
Harassers hate one thing: invisibility. The day their attacks stop appearing on Google, they've lost. They're the ones who remain in the shadows, the ones who will have worked for nothing.
One last word of support
Don't go it alone. Delisting is a technical battle, sometimes thankless, but you don't have to fight it without help. Our association provides free support to victims throughout these processes, explaining the steps, helping you draft reports, and intervening when platforms try to evade their responsibilities.
If you are a victim of doxxing, defamation, or a serious invasion of your privacy, know that this fight can be won. Not always in a day, rarely with a single complaint, but always with perseverance, method, and support.
You are not alone, and you have rights.
Legal Annex – Legal framework applicable to the deindexing and removal of online content
This appendix presents the main laws and case law that allow you to obtain the removal or deindexing of content that infringes on your personal rights. It aims to give each victim a clear understanding of the existing legal avenues, both in France and at the European level, as well as the specific obligations of search engines and hosting sites.
1. The LCEN and the responsibility of hosting providers
The Law for Confidence in the Digital Economy (LCEN), which came into force in 2004, governs the liability of websites and hosting providers in France. It establishes a simple principle: a hosting provider is not automatically liable for the content published on its service, but becomes fully liable as soon as it becomes aware of manifestly illegal content and fails to remove it promptly.
This includes: defamation, slander, invasion of privacy, harassment, identity theft, non-consensual distribution of images, publication of personal data without consent (doxxing), or any other content that infringes on a person's rights.
When a victim informs a website or hosting provider of illegal content, the latter has a legal obligation to act promptly. In the event of refusal or inaction, its civil and criminal liability may be incurred. Search engines are not explicitly targeted by the LCEN (Law for Confidence in the Digital Economy), but court decisions tend to impose an obligation on them to remove content as soon as the victim demonstrates clear harm.
2. The GDPR and the “right to erasure” (right to be forgotten)
The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), applicable since 2018, gives European citizens a fundamental right: the right to obtain the erasure of personal data concerning them when it is inaccurate, excessive, harmful, or published without their consent.
Personal data can include your name, address, phone number, photos, videos, or any information that can identify you. When this data appears in content that constitutes harassment, doxxing, or defamation, the right to erasure fully applies.
Search engines are considered “data controllers” under the GDPR. They must therefore remove results linking to content that infringes on individuals' rights as soon as a request is made. This principle has been established by several rulings of the CJEU and the French Council of State.
However, be aware that Google only applies this right within the European Union, which leaves the content visible in the rest of the world. This is why the GDPR form is often insufficient for victims of global harassment.
3. European case law: Google as a responsible actor
In 2014, the “Google Spain” ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) established an essential rule: a search engine can be forced to delist content when its presence infringes on the privacy or reputation of a person, even if the original content remains accessible on the original site.
Since this ruling, several decisions in France have confirmed this principle and have forced Google to deindex defamatory content, sensitive personal data, or outdated articles that damage an individual's reputation.
French courts have notably recognized:
– that a person's name is protected personal data, – that the dissemination of false accusations, even old ones, constitutes real harm, – that search engines must remove disputed links even if the source site refuses to remove the content.
4. International case law: the case of ignored requests
In 2023, a Canadian court ordered Google to pay over $500,000 for refusing, for more than fifteen years, to remove defamatory search results targeting a completely exonerated real estate agent. This decision illustrates a well-known phenomenon: Google almost systematically rejects requests, even legitimate ones, pushing victims into dire situations.
This judgment shows, however, that search engines are not above the law, and that significant damages can be obtained when the platform refuses to act despite clear evidence.
5. The application of the DMCA: an extremely effective lever
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), a US law, allows anyone to request the removal of content that infringes their copyright. This law does not require you to be an artist or professional: a simple personal photograph is protected.
In doxxing cases where private photos are stolen and reused, the DMCA becomes a particularly powerful tool. Google responds much faster and more favorably to these cases than to requests based on privacy or defamation.
The DMCA often makes it possible to obtain deindexing even when Google refuses other approaches.
6. Legal recourse in case of repeated refusals
When a search engine repeatedly refuses a removal request despite clear infringement, it is possible to contact the public prosecutor or initiate civil proceedings. A judge can order the immediate de-indexing of the results, subject to a financial penalty, and award damages for the moral harm suffered.
This legal route remains particularly useful in cases of serious defamation, organized harassment, or when the engine puts up abusive resistance despite clear evidence.
The legal framework protects victims, but its application often requires perseverance and a precise understanding of the mechanisms. The combination of the LCEN (Law for Confidence in the Digital Economy), the GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation), the DMCA (Directive on the Modernization of Copyright Act), and case law provides a robust set of tools to compel search engines to act. No search engine has the right to allow content to infringe upon your dignity, your safety, or your reputation.
A victim is never without recourse. The law, in France, Europe, and North America, recognizes their absolute right to regain control.
Comments