4 ms·

Good lord, would people please stop taking the weakest part of my statement? Let's discuss the substance of this law.

• DanBC 12y ago
  When I search for a particular person's name; on a European server; and that person has asked for information to be de-linked; and the search engine agrees that the information is no longer relevant and the person is not in the public eye and etc; then some URLs won't be returned for some particular search terms. To compare that to Chinese oppression (you get shot in the head and your family gets a bill for the bullet) is perverse.
  • vonmoltke 12y ago
    > the search engine agrees that the information is no longer relevant and the person is not in the public eye Unless I am mistaken, there is no "agreement". This law functions like the DMCA: when Google gets a valid request, the must remove the specified results and fight the removal from this position, if they choose to. > To compare that to Chinese oppression (you get shot in the head and your family gets a bill for the bullet) is perverse. "Chinese oppression" is not an all-or-nothing thing. Comparing this to aspects of Chinese oppression may not be fair and may be calculated to provoke an emotional response, but it is not equivocating it to all the oppressive actions the Chinese regime is responsible for.
    • DanBC 12y ago
      Where did you get the impression that this is like the DMCA and all requests must be acted on? In all the commentary I've seen so far that's been one of the complaints: that companies have this duty to assess whether the information is no longer relevant or whether the person is in the public eye.