Insights on the First Three Years of the Right to Be Forgotten at Google

Re:Insights on the First Three Years of the Right to Be Forg... by Xylakant on Tuesday February 27, 2018 @01:58AM (#16471582)

Why should history not be forgotten? It used it be that way all the time before we managed to build information storage large enough to capture this huge amount of data. And at what cost does it come that we never forget? Not all too long ago (1993-1997), there was a large trial against 25 people for alleged child abuse in germany. (1) All were eventually cleared, one person died while in prison before the trial ended. It was one of the largest case of false accusations for child abuse. The names were all over the press. Should those people not have the right to have that memory fade? To have history be forgotten at some point?

> Besides, Google forgets enough even without being told to:

That was not the case when the laws were drafted and enacted.

(Wormser Prozesse, sorry, german only https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wormser_Prozesse)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Insights on the First Three Years of the Right to Be Forg... by aeorgnoieang on Tuesday February 27, 2018 @11:45AM (#16475163)

Should those people have the 'right' to be remembered, falsely, as child abusers? Should anything and everything every written about the case be expunged? Should individuals be responsible for purging their diaries of such information too? Why not? Someone might upload it to the Internet in the future and, because everyone else officially 'forgot', who will remain to remember that this is officially prohibited information?

[ Parent | on HN ]