"'Right to be forgotten' rules" Topic
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to The Law Plus Board
|GarrisonMiniatures ||19 Aug 2014 3:37 p.m. PST|
on Google don't seem to be having the intended effect.
Basically, in the EU people have gained the right to be 'forgotton' by search engines such as Google as far as old news go. Some of these were BBC stories so obviously the BBC is reporting it as a new news stories and providing links to the originals…
… such as the car thief branded 'an idiot' by his own barrister link and an entry on the 'merits of hummus' link
| Sue Kes ||20 Aug 2014 2:10 a.m. PST|
Apparently there's a website, "hiddenfromgoogle.com", where you can catch up on the entries which have been … well, hidden from Google. That's humans for you, they'll get round anything!
|freewargamesrules ||20 Aug 2014 3:44 a.m. PST|
There are certain aspects of the act I agree with. If you were wrongly accused and found innocent you should be removed.
However, criminals and paedophiles wanting their past records removed should be refused. People have made comments on blogs and newspages and now want the whole page removed as they regret what they've said. Tough think before you comment.
|GarrisonMiniatures ||20 Aug 2014 8:16 a.m. PST|
That would generally be my view. If someone else publishes something about you that is derogatory then you should have the right to have it removed if it is wrong or unproven – and by wrong I don't mean that only you think it's wrong – and can be shown to be having a detrimental effect on you.
If it can be shown to be correct or has been proven, then I think removal should only occur in exceptional circumstances.
Put it on yourself or give permission for use – for example, you gave an interview or made a comment on a forum – then you did it – live with it.
|Parzival||25 Aug 2014 12:02 p.m. PST|
If a "right" requires others to act in order for the "right" to even happen, then there's a good chance it's not really a right.
The right to free speech requires others to do nothing.
The right to freedom of belief (religion) requires others to do nothing.
Even the right to property really only requires that others refrain from taking what everyone agrees is someone else's stuff.
But the "right to be forgotten" requires that others act to deliberately destroy evidence of one's foolish actions. That's not a right, that's a fool's dream.
|Last Hussar||22 Nov 2014 6:40 a.m. PST|
If you are liable to be fired because you espouse a point of view your employer disagrees with then you don't have free speech – you have to arrange your life to accomodate someone else.
Or the US myth of the pilgrims fleeing religious persecution. Actually their religious freedom was persecuting others. ISIS are just expressing their religion.