3 ms·

For starters, they could require a court order for each case. That would certainly limit the amount of requests.

• jim-greer 12y ago
  That sequencing is probably not in compliance with the law. The fact sheet put out by the European high court makes it explicit: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/files/factsheets/factsheet_data_protection_en.pdf http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/files/factsheets... "In practice, a search engine will have to delete information when it receives a specific request from a person affected... Google will then have to assess the deletion request on a case-by-case basis and to apply the criteria mentioned in EU law and the European Court’s judgment.... The request may for example be turned down where the search engine operator concludes that for particular reasons, such as for example the public role played by John Smith, the interest of the general public to have access to the information in question justifies showing the links in Google search results. In such cases, John Smith still has the option to complain to national data protection supervisory authorities or to national courts. Public authorities will be the ultimate arbiters of the application of the Right to be Forgotten. "
  • Dylan16807 12y ago
    I interpreted 'they' as the lawmakers, not google.
    • troels 12y ago
      Yes, that's what I meant.