4 ms·

Does Google want to do a good job of assessing requests? I think it highly unlikely that the court would want this article suppressed. I think Google may be ta

Does Google want to do a good job of assessing requests? I think it highly unlikely that the court would want this article suppressed. I think Google may be taking things down over enthusiastically to bring the law and the ruling into disrepute. They are betting that the law rather than their particular takedown process will be blamed.

dragonwriter 12y ago
The law imposes a penalty if an appropriate request is not honored, but does not, as I understand, do so if an inappropriate request is honored. It therefore encourages exactly the behavior Google is taking, because erring on the side of taking things down is the legally safe approach. The DMCA notice/counternotice arrangement has a similar but more subtle effect, because while it is superficially symmetric, the situation of the parties with respect to it is asymmetric in a way which results in the one side systematically being privileged.
- josephlord 12y ago
  Are you sure that is right? Penalties for contempt of court, for not having a process or for always denying requests as a process I can imagine but can you link to anything referring to the penalties for making wrong judgements in this area. I'm quite sympathetic to the idea that the rules may be wrong or could be made better but I think that there being some control in this area is a good idea on balance. The FAQ someone linked to refers to balance of freedom of speech and data protection so there is the possibilities of complaints from both sides.
josephlord 12y ago
Google representative on the radio today indicated that the search result suppressed is for one of the thread's commenters and not for the bank executive's name which will still return the correct link. Given this my comment is probably too harsh, there is no evidence that Google isn't properly assessing requests that I am aware of.

dragonwriter 12y ago

The law imposes a penalty if an appropriate request is not honored, but does not, as I understand, do so if an inappropriate request is honored. It therefore encourages exactly the behavior Google is taking, because erring on the side of taking things down is the legally safe approach. The DMCA notice/counternotice arrangement has a similar but more subtle effect, because while it is superficially symmetric, the situation of the parties with respect to it is asymmetric in a way which results in the one side systematically being privileged.

josephlord 12y ago
Are you sure that is right? Penalties for contempt of court, for not having a process or for always denying requests as a process I can imagine but can you link to anything referring to the penalties for making wrong judgements in this area. I'm quite sympathetic to the idea that the rules may be wrong or could be made better but I think that there being some control in this area is a good idea on balance. The FAQ someone linked to refers to balance of freedom of speech and data protection so there is the possibilities of complaints from both sides.

josephlord 12y ago

Google representative on the radio today indicated that the search result suppressed is for one of the thread's commenters and not for the bank executive's name which will still return the correct link. Given this my comment is probably too harsh, there is no evidence that Google isn't properly assessing requests that I am aware of.