[rbehrends]

I'd need evidence for that claim.

The data protection directive was passed in 1995, almost two decades ago. Google didn't exist back then. That would have been the EU playing a very long game, not to mention requiring amazing precognitive powers.

On the merits of the case, the ECJ's judgement was about the narrowest judgement that was possible given the text of the directive.

The part of the judgement that created the issue we're looking at now was that the ECJ decided that Google was subject to jurisdiction of other EU member states for purposes of data protection if it did business there (e.g., by selling advertising there). While there are some tricky legal issues involved here, that was hardly an outrageous ruling, given the goals of the common market.

Suddenly Google couldn't hide behind the Irish courts anymore, but people with a complaint were able to bring suit in their own country.

You can make a good argument that the outdated data protection directive is in dire need of revision, but claims of subterfuge by EU bureaucrats are tinfoil hattery in this case.