News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Google loses ‘right to be forgotten’ case. Parent comment

Re:Google loses ‘right to be forgotten’ case by contravariant on Friday April 13, 2018 @08:16PM (#16835026)
It's not entirely clear to me that there's no defamation going on.

Does running an add linking to the article for anyone interested in that person's name count as defamation? And if so, why would it be different if google chose included it prominently amongst the search results?

I'm not entirely convinced that this should count as defamation, but there is room for debate.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google loses ‘right to be forgotten’ case by openasocket on Friday April 13, 2018 @09:04PM (#16835221)
Information has to be false for it to be defamation, it's in the definition. The news article they are trying to de-list does not contain false information.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google loses ‘right to be forgotten’ case by karmajunkie on Friday April 13, 2018 @11:23PM (#16835700)
It doesn't have to be false for it to be defamatory. It has to be intended to ruin someone's reputation in an unwarranted manner.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google loses ‘right to be forgotten’ case by openasocket on Saturday April 14, 2018 @08:54AM (#16837102)
Not in any legal jurisdiction I'm aware of, and certainly not the EU Courts. Truth is an absolute defense against defamation.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google loses ‘right to be forgotten’ case by karmajunkie on Saturday April 14, 2018 @11:28AM (#16837708)
Truth is an absolute defense, except when its not.

http://www.aaronkellylaw.com/truth-and-defamation/

[ Parent | on HN ]