The issue under discussion in this lawsuit is that the subject of the article is claiming that her birthyear is private information, but the Wikipedia article's source for the birthyear is a book that she herself published[1].
I think some things are being lost in translation in this article, but generally speaking in many European privacy laws you can argue that something that's private information is in the public interest, or you can argue that it's not really private, either because the subject is a public person, or that it's a generally well-known fact.
I think it's really a stretch to maintain that your birthyear is private information if you're a screenwriter/director who has a self-authored book saying what year you were born in. Your birthyear is public information at that point by any reasonable definition.
I think some things are being lost in translation in this article, but generally speaking in many European privacy laws you can argue that something that's private information is in the public interest, or you can argue that it's not really private, either because the subject is a public person, or that it's a generally well-known fact.
I think it's really a stretch to maintain that your birthyear is private information if you're a screenwriter/director who has a self-authored book saying what year you were born in. Your birthyear is public information at that point by any reasonable definition.
1. http://www.amazon.com/Tradition-lyrischen-Hofmannsthal-unive...