

EU court backs 'right to be forgotten' in Google case - ghosh
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-27388289#TWEET1127389

======
fauigerzigerk
Asking search engines not to display stuff that is out there is certainly
problematic. No doubt about that. However, they are already required to filter
out links to copyrighted material, so the principle of filtering out certain
things for legal reasons is already established.

It seems disproportionate to protect copyright holders from economic damage
but refuse to protect individuals against being stigmatized forever because of
some mistake they made many years ago based on a principle that has already
been breached.

~~~
chopin
It even doesn't need to be a mistake. It can be very easily a false accusation
as well.

~~~
onion2k
The laws of defamation would deal with false things quite adequately. We don't
need new legislation for that.

~~~
Someone
Adequately? Try suing some anonymous person X who posted something on a site S
hosted in country C, describing something you allegedly did in country D,
while you live in country E. Then try removing that data from site T in
country F quoting the now removed data from site S.

------
mnw21cam
Other thread:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7737061](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7737061)

~~~
dang
Thank you. Burying as dupe.

------
coldcode
Maybe Google can be forced to remove something but the NSA can't. It's a
selective 'forgetting'.

