3 ms·

It quite clearly states in the article that the laws apply to individuals requesting their personal data to be removed. This is not censorship. I agree there's

by NovaS1X 11y ago

It quite clearly states in the article that the laws apply to individuals requesting their personal data to be removed. This is not censorship. I agree there's a fine line that needs to be walked however I'm very sick and tired of the invasion of privacy that's become acceptable today and Google is an offender. I'v made my personal decisions to move away from as many Google services as possible and use pseudonyms as that's my choice and right, however, I do this because in Canada we don't have the same privacy protections that France does. I am well aware that by using Google Services I'm willingly giving up my information in exchange for their use and I've tailored my life around that assumption, however, not everyone is adept at this like I am and I think it's not morally alright to refuse the deletion of data requested by the individual who should rightfully own and control that data. I'm very, very, sick of the state of privacy today and I wish Google would've been fined significantly more. EDIT: for grammar

oh_sigh 11y ago
Shouldn't the individuals request that their data is removed from the primary source? If that happens, google will relatively quickly remove those results from their index.
- DanBC 11y ago
  Yes, people should do that. Here's some thinking from 2010 about right to be forgotten and EU data protection law: https://secure.edps.europa.eu/EDPSWEB/webdav/shared/Documents/EDPS/Publications/Speeches/2010/10-06-07_Speech_Cyber-harassment_EN.pdf https://secure.edps.europa.eu/EDPSWEB/webdav/shared/Document... - It is important to highlight the persistent memory of the internet regarding the information used for the harassment. This information might stay for ever on the web and will be extremely difficult to erase completely. This point presents a great challenge for the respect of the right to be forgotten or for the enforcement of an appropriate and proportionate data retention policy. Here again the providers of such platforms are in a position to play a determinant role and their role could be driven by the respect of data protection rules which can, if properly implemented, mitigate the side effects produced by these three factors. Ignore this next bit - I'm wrong. I'm leaving it here because people have already responded to it. {RTBF arose because a man was a victim of harassment, where the harasser was creating very many websites across the world using fake details to do so with a variety of hosting services who had a variety of responses to the man's legal paperwork. At that point his only recourse was to go to the search engines and ask them to stop republishing (which is what the search result text snippets are doing) the harassment.} There are protections built into the RTBF for stuff that's in the public interest. EU and US have pretty different understanding of rights. US has strong freedom of speech, EU has strong right to privacy.
  - thrownaway2424 11y ago
    I don't know where you got that the RTBF came from harassment. The case was about a man who didn't want people to be able to find out that his house had been repossessed by creditors: " On 5 March 2010, Mr Costeja González, a Spanish national resident in Spain, lodged with the AEPD a complaint against La Vanguardia Ediciones SL, which publishes a daily newspaper with a large circulation, in particular in Catalonia (Spain) (‘La Vanguardia’), and against Google Spain and Google Inc. The complaint was based on the fact that, when an internet user entered Mr Costeja González’s name in the search engine of the Google group (‘Google Search’), he would obtain links to two pages of La Vanguardia’s newspaper, of 19 January and 9 March 1998 respectively, on which an announcement mentioning Mr Costeja González’s name appeared for a real-estate auction connected with attachment proceedings for the recovery of social security debts."
  - curt15 11y ago
    >RTBF arose because a man was a victim of harassment, where the harasser was creating very many websites across the world using fake details to do so with a variety of hosting services who had a variety of responses to the man's legal paperwork. No, RTBF was invented when Mario Costeja González decided that a perfectly factual archived news article concerning him (http://hemeroteca.lavanguardia.com/preview/1998/01/19/pagina-23/33842001/pdf.html http://hemeroteca.lavanguardia.com/preview/1998/01/19/pagina...) was inconvenient.
ryanobjc 11y ago
The ironic thing is the right to be forgotten is about public data, and that is what Google is arguing over. Perhaps there should be a global right to be forgotten, but it has to be implemented in a correct fashion. Opening loopholes for despotic regimes to be an editor over Google search results is not ok. As for not using the Google services, your comment on the face of it is a nice little narrative. Although ironically the data you share with Google has some of the best privacy protections, and you can delete it at any time you wish. Also it doesn't affect search results, so you are not really doing anything other than taking a moral stand, and limiting your access to services, some of which I personally find quite excellent and good.

by NovaS1X 11y ago

oh_sigh 11y ago

Shouldn't the individuals request that their data is removed from the primary source? If that happens, google will relatively quickly remove those results from their index.

DanBC 11y ago
Yes, people should do that. Here's some thinking from 2010 about right to be forgotten and EU data protection law: https://secure.edps.europa.eu/EDPSWEB/webdav/shared/Documents/EDPS/Publications/Speeches/2010/10-06-07_Speech_Cyber-harassment_EN.pdf https://secure.edps.europa.eu/EDPSWEB/webdav/shared/Document... - It is important to highlight the persistent memory of the internet regarding the information used for the harassment. This information might stay for ever on the web and will be extremely difficult to erase completely. This point presents a great challenge for the respect of the right to be forgotten or for the enforcement of an appropriate and proportionate data retention policy. Here again the providers of such platforms are in a position to play a determinant role and their role could be driven by the respect of data protection rules which can, if properly implemented, mitigate the side effects produced by these three factors. Ignore this next bit - I'm wrong. I'm leaving it here because people have already responded to it. {RTBF arose because a man was a victim of harassment, where the harasser was creating very many websites across the world using fake details to do so with a variety of hosting services who had a variety of responses to the man's legal paperwork. At that point his only recourse was to go to the search engines and ask them to stop republishing (which is what the search result text snippets are doing) the harassment.} There are protections built into the RTBF for stuff that's in the public interest. EU and US have pretty different understanding of rights. US has strong freedom of speech, EU has strong right to privacy.
- thrownaway2424 11y ago
  I don't know where you got that the RTBF came from harassment. The case was about a man who didn't want people to be able to find out that his house had been repossessed by creditors: " On 5 March 2010, Mr Costeja González, a Spanish national resident in Spain, lodged with the AEPD a complaint against La Vanguardia Ediciones SL, which publishes a daily newspaper with a large circulation, in particular in Catalonia (Spain) (‘La Vanguardia’), and against Google Spain and Google Inc. The complaint was based on the fact that, when an internet user entered Mr Costeja González’s name in the search engine of the Google group (‘Google Search’), he would obtain links to two pages of La Vanguardia’s newspaper, of 19 January and 9 March 1998 respectively, on which an announcement mentioning Mr Costeja González’s name appeared for a real-estate auction connected with attachment proceedings for the recovery of social security debts."
- curt15 11y ago
  >RTBF arose because a man was a victim of harassment, where the harasser was creating very many websites across the world using fake details to do so with a variety of hosting services who had a variety of responses to the man's legal paperwork. No, RTBF was invented when Mario Costeja González decided that a perfectly factual archived news article concerning him (http://hemeroteca.lavanguardia.com/preview/1998/01/19/pagina-23/33842001/pdf.html http://hemeroteca.lavanguardia.com/preview/1998/01/19/pagina...) was inconvenient.

ryanobjc 11y ago

The ironic thing is the right to be forgotten is about public data, and that is what Google is arguing over. Perhaps there should be a global right to be forgotten, but it has to be implemented in a correct fashion. Opening loopholes for despotic regimes to be an editor over Google search results is not ok. As for not using the Google services, your comment on the face of it is a nice little narrative. Although ironically the data you share with Google has some of the best privacy protections, and you can delete it at any time you wish. Also it doesn't affect search results, so you are not really doing anything other than taking a moral stand, and limiting your access to services, some of which I personally find quite excellent and good.