Complaint Mechanisms against Google for the Distortion of the Name “Persian Gulf”

Extended Abstract

1. Introduction

In the era of digital technology dominance, platforms such as Google Maps function not only as navigation tools but also as primary sources in shaping users' geographical memory worldwide. Within this context, the distortion of geographical data—especially established historical names—is no longer merely a technical error but an interference in historical narrative and cultural identity. A notable example of this phenomenon is Google’s replacement of the documented and historical name “Persian Gulf” with the fabricated term “Arabian Gulf.” This act, despite objections from academic, cultural, international, and civil institutions, continues and has serious implications for the cultural, identity-related, and media integrity of the Iranian nation. This research seeks to analyze and explain legal, technical, and diplomatic strategies to counter such distortion and to compel Google to adhere to credible documents and international standards, relying on the principles of international law.

2. Research Problem

The central issue addressed in this paper is the feasibility of pursuing legal action against Google for distorting the name “Persian Gulf” through existing legal, international, technical, and civil mechanisms. The main question is: What effective tools exist within domestic legal systems, United Nations mechanisms, and technical expert bodies to compel Google to use the official and historical name “Persian Gulf”? The importance of this issue lies in the fact that such distortion is not merely a violation of historical truth but also infringes upon cultural rights, the right to participate in the preservation of historical memory, and the right to linguistic identity—concepts emphasized in foundational documents of international law such as human rights covenants, cultural heritage conventions, and United Nations resolutions. Thus, what may appear to be a technical or geographical issue is deeply tied to the core of cultural and identity-related matters of societies and carries increasing significance under international law.

3. Methodology

This study adopts an analytical-descriptive approach to examine and compare national and international legal frameworks. The author draws upon international instruments, practices of specialized institutions, U.S. and European Union laws, human rights reports, and cultural conventions to explore the structure of complaints and legal pursuit in four major areas:

1. The U.S. legal system

2. The European Union legal system

3. UN bodies and special human rights mechanisms

4. International technical and quasi-judicial bodies

This multidimensional method offers a comprehensive picture of the available mechanisms for pursuing the issue at various levels.

4. Key Findings



Based on the analysis presented in this article, an effective strategy for pursuing the distortion of the name “Persian Gulf” requires synergy among three complementary pathways:

a. Invoking national laws and organizational regulations focusing on consumer rights violations and public deception:



In the United States, it is possible to file a complaint against Google under the Lanham Act (trademark law) and the regulations of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The distortion of the name “Persian Gulf” may be classified as misleading information and pursued through civil liability and deceptive advertising provisions. Additionally, five mechanisms within the European Union, based on two of its official directives, offer frameworks for submitting such complaints.

b. Utilizing international law and United Nations mechanisms:

Submitting complaints to bodies such as UNESCO, the United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names, the Special Rapporteur in the field of cultural rights, and the United Nations Human Rights Council is a key route to confronting the distortion. According to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), and relevant UNESCO instruments, replacing the name “Persian Gulf” constitutes a violation of a nation's cultural rights and linguistic heritage.

c. Activating technical, scientific, and civil bodies:

Entities such as ICANN (regarding domains and addresses) and FIG (in global cartographic standards) play a significant role in scientific documentation, exerting technical pressure, and developing global standards. These institutions can support geographic truth through the publication of guidelines, expert consultations, or participation in international policy-making processes.

5. Contribution to International Law

This article innovatively reframes what appears to be a geographical dispute as a multilayered issue within international law. By integrating norms of human rights law, cultural rights, consumer protection, and geomatics technical standards, the author offers a composite framework for countering the distortion of historical narratives. This research fills existing gaps in international legal literature concerning digital narrative manipulation and demonstrates how non-state actors such as tech corporations can become the subject of legal claims in the realm of cultural rights and historical identity.

6. Implications and Applications

The findings of this research bear significant implications across theoretical, practical, and policy-making levels:

• Theoretical: It expands the understanding of international law by recognizing digital distortion as a violation of cultural rights and the shared heritage of humanity.

• Practical: It proposes a multi-phase model for legal and media-based action against companies like Google, through complaints to domestic, international, and technical bodies.

• Policy-making: It suggests formally registering the name “Persian Gulf” as intangible cultural heritage with UNESCO, strengthening cooperation with the International Federation of Surveyors (FIG), and preparing legal documentation for use in oversight processes of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

7. Conclusion

This study demonstrates that countering the distortion of the name “Persian Gulf” is not only feasible but also achievable through the utilization of legal, international, and technical platforms. By outlining the cultural, legal, and technical dimensions of the issue, the article presents a comprehensive model for pursuing the case and defending Iran’s historical heritage. Ultimately, the research emphasizes the need for a coordinated, evidence-based, and multi-level effort to preserve historical truths in the face of digital distortion.



Keywords: Persian Gulf, Google, historical identity distortion, United Nations