4 ms·
Interesting times! I'm just glad English defamation law doesn't apply to me. Most people are simply too lazy to run their own web crawler. I'm not sure why t
by arh68 12y ago
Interesting times! I'm just glad English defamation law doesn't apply to me.
Most people are simply too lazy to run their own web crawler. I'm not sure why this is (the technology is well known), but they find the convenience of public search engines irresistible.
Of course the ruling doesn't disallow crawlers, even personal ones, to access the Post's review. It doesn't even prohibit Google from displaying the links in full, as long as the search criteria does not contain Dejan's name.
Google hardly has the right to free speech anyway. DMCA can remove links willy nilly. Even fraudulent takedown requests are processed smoothly, with little to no repercussions. It's easy to be idealistic about free speech. Yet to see the balance between people claiming harm and the people's need to know, to have seen the pendulum swung before, it's hard to get upset about this.
- jxcole 12y agoYou cannot actually be harmed by speech, and you certainly can't be harmed by a piano review. The EU has ruled wrong in this case.
- RexRollman 12y agoIndeed it has. It really should be labeled as "The Right To Suppress What You Don't Care For".
- vidarh 12y agoThis is either incredibly pedantic, or incredibly ignorant. While you can not be directly harmed merely by the speech itself, you can certainly be indirectly harmed by it's continued wide public dissemination, on the basis of others reactions to it. > and you certainly can't be harmed by a piano review. The EU has ruled wrong in this case. The EU has not ruled that you can get a piano review removed.