7 ms·

In my own opinion, if you’re arrested, have paid the standard debt to society that we all (in theory) have agreed on, and gone back into society seeking a job…

In my own opinion, if you’re arrested, have paid the standard debt to society that we all (in theory) have agreed on, and gone back into society seeking a job… forcing people to constantly deal with their old (non violent) crimes seems like extra-judicial punishment for very little benefit. Even worse to leave that punishment to a private company.

eli 3y ago
Hmm so is that just crimes or anyone can get anything bad they’ve done removed from the internet?
- graypegg 3y ago
  GP comment was about specifically information about crimes. Not sure what precedence is set by the decision mentioned in the article.
  - eli 3y ago
    Just seems awfully hard to draw a line. So if the victim of the crime published an essay about what happened, are they allowed to tell their own story and have it listed in Google? What if it’s a story about conduct that could be criminal but for which you were never charged?
    - twoodfin 3y ago
      Fortunately, in the US it’s fairly easy to draw a line: There’s no First Amendment exception for “I’d rather you didn’t remind people of that.”
      - eli 3y ago
        I wouldn’t be so certain of how the first amendment applies to tech platforms (esp as interpreted by current SCOTUS) This case could go either way https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/09/scotus-to-review-florida-and-texas-social-media-laws-in-big-tech-vs-gop-battle/amp/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/09/scotus-to-review...
wahnfrieden 3y ago
You would've had Epstein's history erased after his first stint in jail
Teever 3y ago
Do you think a world where it is illegal for a victim to tell other people that someone victimized them is a just world?
Vvector 3y ago
Where do you draw the line? My SIL, divorced with a young daughter, started dating a man. My wife (her sister) googled him and discovered he was a convicted child molester. What if I was hiring an accountant? Should I be able to google him and find out he had been convicted of embezzlement?
- djbusby 3y ago
  The line is surely at "inaccurate" which is mentioned up-thread and in the case. Neither of your scenarios describe an inaccurate datum, just old (but not outdated)
  - eli 3y ago
    Hmm is this really about “privacy” then? Seems like privacy would mostly be about things that are accurate. We already have laws about libel and defamation. Who decides what’s inaccurate or outdated? I think the subject of a negative article may often feel it’s inaccurate even if it’s generally correct.
  - Vvector 3y ago
    I was responding to the poster who claimed that this is an "extra-judicial punishment" after the person has "paid the standard debt to society". If someone was convicted in a court of law, the information isn't inaccurate. Addressing your point, if the newspaper article is inaccurate, why not have the article removed or corrected? Instead, it is the opposite. The man says the articles can stay up. Canadian defamation law is pretty clear. If the article is false, he can sue to have it removed. I'm tending to believe delisting from Google is the man's plan because he can't get the articles removed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_defamation_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_defamation_law FTA: "The man said outdated and inaccurate information about him in newspaper articles found on the internet was leading to great personal harm, including physical assault, employment discrimination, severe social stigma and persistent fear." and "He wanted the information to be delisted – made unsearchable, unless someone knew the website urls featuring his name."
- graypegg 3y ago
anigbrowl 3y ago
if you’re arrested, have paid the standard debt to society [..] It's a little careless to equate arrest with conviction.
- graypegg 3y ago
  Sorry, you’re right, that’s the wrong word. I mean “tried and convicted”.

eli 3y ago

Hmm so is that just crimes or anyone can get anything bad they’ve done removed from the internet?

graypegg 3y ago
GP comment was about specifically information about crimes. Not sure what precedence is set by the decision mentioned in the article.
- eli 3y ago
  Just seems awfully hard to draw a line. So if the victim of the crime published an essay about what happened, are they allowed to tell their own story and have it listed in Google? What if it’s a story about conduct that could be criminal but for which you were never charged?
  - twoodfin 3y ago
    Fortunately, in the US it’s fairly easy to draw a line: There’s no First Amendment exception for “I’d rather you didn’t remind people of that.”
    - eli 3y ago
      I wouldn’t be so certain of how the first amendment applies to tech platforms (esp as interpreted by current SCOTUS) This case could go either way https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/09/scotus-to-review-florida-and-texas-social-media-laws-in-big-tech-vs-gop-battle/amp/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/09/scotus-to-review...

wahnfrieden 3y ago

You would've had Epstein's history erased after his first stint in jail

Teever 3y ago

Do you think a world where it is illegal for a victim to tell other people that someone victimized them is a just world?

Vvector 3y ago

Where do you draw the line? My SIL, divorced with a young daughter, started dating a man. My wife (her sister) googled him and discovered he was a convicted child molester. What if I was hiring an accountant? Should I be able to google him and find out he had been convicted of embezzlement?

djbusby 3y ago
The line is surely at "inaccurate" which is mentioned up-thread and in the case. Neither of your scenarios describe an inaccurate datum, just old (but not outdated)
- eli 3y ago
  Hmm is this really about “privacy” then? Seems like privacy would mostly be about things that are accurate. We already have laws about libel and defamation. Who decides what’s inaccurate or outdated? I think the subject of a negative article may often feel it’s inaccurate even if it’s generally correct.
- Vvector 3y ago
  I was responding to the poster who claimed that this is an "extra-judicial punishment" after the person has "paid the standard debt to society". If someone was convicted in a court of law, the information isn't inaccurate. Addressing your point, if the newspaper article is inaccurate, why not have the article removed or corrected? Instead, it is the opposite. The man says the articles can stay up. Canadian defamation law is pretty clear. If the article is false, he can sue to have it removed. I'm tending to believe delisting from Google is the man's plan because he can't get the articles removed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_defamation_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_defamation_law FTA: "The man said outdated and inaccurate information about him in newspaper articles found on the internet was leading to great personal harm, including physical assault, employment discrimination, severe social stigma and persistent fear." and "He wanted the information to be delisted – made unsearchable, unless someone knew the website urls featuring his name."
graypegg 3y ago

anigbrowl 3y ago

if you’re arrested, have paid the standard debt to society [..] It's a little careless to equate arrest with conviction.

graypegg 3y ago
Sorry, you’re right, that’s the wrong word. I mean “tried and convicted”.