5 ms·
Does this ruling also imply that Google has to censor any websites that discuss this ruling? I mean, all the articles describing the court case also refer to t
by quasque 12y ago
Does this ruling also imply that Google has to censor any websites that discuss this ruling?
I mean, all the articles describing the court case also refer to the very information that the litigant wanted to be removed from the search results.
It seems somewhat contradictory that the reporting of a court case brought to protect his privacy, is simultaneously breaching his privacy.
- wmf 12y agoThis article refers to "a Spanish man"; I didn't see his name.
- pedrocr 12y agoWell there's this caption of a photo of a man holding a phone: "The case involved Spanish man Mario Costeja Gonzalez"
- andreasvc 12y agoWell, you have to admit it's a delightful instance of the Streisand effect. A small consolation for this otherwise unfortunate development.
- nl 12y agoIt's the reporting that is breaching his privacy. And yes, that is what makes this ruling so incredibly dangerous. Whilst personal privacy is important, it needs to be balanced by the right of the broader society to know things. I think this ruling swings to far away from the "right to know".