4 ms·
EU court backs 'right to be forgotten' in Google case
- fauigerzigerk 12y agoAsking search engines not to display stuff that is out there is certainly problematic. No doubt about that. However, they are already required to filter out links to copyrighted material, so the principle of filtering out certain things for legal reasons is already established. It seems disproportionate to protect copyright holders from economic damage but refuse to protect individuals against being stigmatized forever because of some mistake they made many years ago based on a principle that has already been breached.
- chopin 12y agoIt even doesn't need to be a mistake. It can be very easily a false accusation as well.
- onion2k 12y agoThe laws of defamation would deal with false things quite adequately. We don't need new legislation for that.
- Someone 12y agoAdequately? Try suing some anonymous person X who posted something on a site S hosted in country C, describing something you allegedly did in country D, while you live in country E. Then try removing that data from site T in country F quoting the now removed data from site S.
- dzhiurgis 12y agoAlso do not forget government led censorship.
- kretor 12y agoWhen some people draw the wrong conclusions from a piece of information, that doesn't mean nobody should be allowed to see that info.
- mnw21cam 12y agoOther thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7737061 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7737061
- dang 12y agoThank you. Burying as dupe.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- coldcode 12y agoMaybe Google can be forced to remove something but the NSA can't. It's a selective 'forgetting'.