> Are you sure about that? Yep, the right to be forgotten (or to oblivion) predates GDPR. > The implications of what's been said here will on some level impac

> Are you sure about that? Yep, the right to be forgotten (or to oblivion) predates GDPR. > The implications of what's been said here will on some level impact how EU law will apply to countries outside of the EU. Not really, each country still decide by itself. > Remember, GDPR was supposed to apply globally It is not about GDPR. The ruling on one side talks about "versions". Facebook has only one version of its social network, while Google has been known of running different versions of their search engine. For example: Google China is a subsidiary of Google The other side of the ruling is that EU court just said that Europe could not impose the right to be forgotten on countries that did not recognize the law, which is fairly obvious. USA cannot enforce patents on countries that do not recognize them. They also feared - disproportionally given the status of things - that allowing it globally would mean that if North Korea do the same (which they already do BTW) that could lead to state censorship, as if it wasn't already a reality. GDPR is more about the ownership of personal data, the right to data portability, for example, still makes perfect sense and it's not put in danger by this ruling.