4 ms·
> ThePhysicist: I don’t understand where’s the difficulty in answering this request? If the person doesn’t have a user account anymore on the site there shouldn
by tokyodude 8y ago
> ThePhysicist: I don’t understand where’s the difficulty in answering this request? If the person doesn’t have a user account anymore on the site there shouldn’t be much data of him/her left anyway.
Deleting all posts in a forum by a certain user will not delete all posts in a forum by other users that quoted the user who desires to have their data deleted.
- TheSpiceIsLife 8y agoI'm not software expert by any means, but couldn't the deletion script also do a search for quoted text, at least sufficient to comply with the reasonable steps language of the legislation?
- soul_grafitti 8y ago> TheSpiceIsLife > I'm not software expert by any means, but couldn't the deletion script also do a search for quoted text, at least sufficient to comply with the reasonable steps language of the legislation? Devil meet details
- hopler 8y agoThat's fine. A quote isn't the original speaker's data. It's the quoter's data.
- centering 8y agoLol
- wutbrodo 8y agoI would assume so, but are you confident that the law unambiguously permits this? This isn't a rhetorical question, as I don't know a ton about the GDPR, but uncertainty is one of the worst forms of regulatory costs, so it's not really something you can wave off without knowing how it will be interpreted.
- tokyodude 8y agoBy that argument google's index of data isn't the user's data it's google's but the right to be forgotten is specifically about deleting other people's copies of data about a person. In particular the NYTimes reports on Joe Baddy doing something bad. That article arguably belongs to the NYTimes. Google indexes that article with permission from NYTimes. Right to be forgotten requires Google remove the link to NYTimes even though neither Google's index nor the article at NYTimes belong to user.