Hysteria surrounding the ruling is not completely warranted from what I can see. Google's own page one would use to submit such a request specifically says it i

Hysteria surrounding the ruling is not completely warranted from what I can see. Google's own page one would use to submit such a request specifically says it isn't going to do that. https://support.google.com/legal/contact/lr_eudpa?product=websearch# https://support.google.com/legal/contact/lr_eudpa?product=we... > "When evaluating your request, we will look at whether the results include outdated information about you, as well as whether there’s a public interest in the information — for example, we may decline to remove certain information about financial scams, professional malpractice, criminal convictions, or public conduct of government officials." There is a legitimate problem with Google's search results listing harassing links to persons. Revenge porn would be a terrific example. If there is something on the internet about you that you don't want there. It isn't possible to remove it, that would be absurd but your public facing name on the internet shouldn't be clouded by unwarranted defamation material. They do at least promise not to remove professional malpractices and the like. I doubt for instance they would not return reviews about your business on yelp or similar. A much larger issue that needs to be tackled is DMCA, which is being abused today. We have tried DMCA and it needs some reform. We haven't really tried right to be forgotten yet, and I just don't see that the downsides outweigh the potential benefits. BBC publishing links that have been deemed by persons who are the subject of the links to be bad; paints a giant bullseye on those links.