Issue 3C. Whether there is any use of data in HK? 9 . No use in HK (“use” under the PDPO does not extend to the mere search, retrieval and display of data on a computer screen where nothing further PC agrees with X that the meaning of “use” of per- X says GL uses the search results in HK by displaying sonal data includes data displayed to internet users publishing and making available X s personal data to inter, ' in HK. net users in HK. Different from GL Different from GL Same as X Same as PC will be done with it. Different from PC and X Rcfercnce: section 78 of Appellant4 s reply statement Issue 4. Whether Google is a “data user”? 10 No. Not enough control to be considered data use. Different from GL It is the operator/publisher of the online news arti- Same as X cles/posts which have control. GL cannot change the configuration of the website covering the con- In addition to X，s points，more recent cases overseas (in EU and British Columbia) held that tents in question. Google is not a passive website in providing inforDifferent from PC and X mation to internet users. Different from GL Same as PC X relies on defamation cases to support the argument that GL has certain control over data processing involved during the search process and hence is capable of being a data user under the PDPO. X also says a person "either alone or jointly or in common with other persons are considered as data user. GL may not be the sole data user, but it is wrong to say GL has no ', control.