3 ms·
The EU has it out for Google in particular. Why don't they go after the sites that have the information in the first place? Regardless, if you have a news stor
by GoofballJones 12y ago
The EU has it out for Google in particular. Why don't they go after the sites that have the information in the first place?
Regardless, if you have a news story about you, that you did something, it should be there as information forever. If the story is correct, then it's there. 20 years from now, you shouldn't have the right to say to some search engine that just happens to index it that you don't want it indexed anymore. The facts are still the same. The news story is still accurate. The site that has the news story still has it. Just because it may paint you in a negative light 20 years ago still doesn't mean you get the right to expunge that from the public record.
The implications of this are just chilling and far reaching.
- zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 12y agoNoone is "going after" anyone. Some guy sued Google, the court decided the case they were presented with (and said some things that are applicable outside the specific case). As for the actual matter, I disagree. In particular, there are quite a few steps between "expunge from the public record" and "make it the most visible thing on the web", where the latter quite clearly is in conflict with the goal of resocialization in the justice system, for example.