How Google determined our right to be forgotten

Re:How Google determined our right to be forgotten by nl on Wednesday February 18, 2015 @05:17AM (#9067783)

Publishers, too, have a case to answer. Was La Vanguardia entirely in the right to republish its entire archive, or was it careless?

It's interesting that is the only piece of discussion in that whole multipage article about how the information ended up in public in the first place.

I guess it's a better story to blame faceless machines and algorithms than for a newspaper to blame another lazy, thoughtless newspaper publisher?

I think there are issues around how Google deals with exposure of personal information (think deliberate trolling campaigns). But this is a weak story that provides no insight into what future issues of privacy will look like.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How Google determined our right to be forgotten by eterm on Wednesday February 18, 2015 @05:28AM (#9067804)

Are you really trying to attack a newspaper for digitizing its archives?

That isn't a "lazy, thoughtless" action.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How Google determined our right to be forgotten by cbr on Wednesday February 18, 2015 @08:50AM (#9068441)

Newspapers digitizing their archives is great; it's their rejection of the initial removal request that should have been challenged. Removing things from indexes makes much less sense than removing them at their source.

Disclaimer: I work for Google as an engineer on open source software.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How Google determined our right to be forgotten by nl on Wednesday February 18, 2015 @06:20AM (#9067924)

Of course not.

I'm blaming both newspapers for not standing up and going "Google is making content we made available searchable. We can't just blame them for it".

[ Parent | on HN ]