How long will it be before right-to-be-forgotten infrastructure becomes abused for something like taking down a competitor's visibility?<p>I wonder.
I'm a bit baffled at Googles implementation here. They have turned a single decision (though at a high court) into a seemingly automated process where everyone can have stuff removed that just mentions their name by filling out some web form:<p><a href="https://support.google.com/legal/contact/lr_eudpa?product=websearch" rel="nofollow">https://support.google.com/legal/contact/lr_eudpa?product=we...</a><p>Theres no obligation to go that far. Make people pay a lawyer when they want to get something removed.<p>Basically, treat it as the DMCA requests: remove the stuff and post the full request on a ChillingEffects-like site, and hint at that when a search included removed results.
When one of the early apparently outrageous cases of removal came out I was critical of Google removing stuff that seemed completely appropriate but it turned out that the removal wasn't of terms related to the person in the article but was one of the commenters. As such I reversed my position and apologised to Google.<p>I haven't investi these removals but wanted to share my experience of jumping to conclusions that Google wasn't making appropriate judgements. Without looking closely I would now tend to give Google the benefit of the doubt on these judgement issues (and I really don't trust Google on other things such as privacy).
It's strange to have articles about suicides, prevention, and getting help next to articles that are actively trying put peoples back in a past they would like to have a break with.
That was a bit confusing, here The Times is not the NY Times...<p><a href="http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/?CMP=INTstp2" rel="nofollow">http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/?CMP=INTstp2</a>
Congratulations to the EU courts. Through great skill and determination they have managed to construct the world's first self-Streisanding privacy law.
I don't think this policy is bad for the EU. Google will remove articles faster than publications can notice and report on their removal. Most EU citizens will not care enough to use non-EU Google sites on a regular basis.
<i>Unlike in the United States, where freedom of expression is a fundamental right that supersedes other interests, Europe views an individual’s privacy and freedom of expression as almost equal rights.</i><p>Except everybody knows that the right privacy is not the reason. EUrocrats needed to use subterfuge as an opening salvo for the beginnings of censorship, so this is what they came up with.<p>But there's no surprise that NYT would give the EU the benefit of the doubt, since they tend to fawn all over whatever wacky EU policies are implemented anyway.