Although I can understand that people, certainly myself, might not want everything posted online about them to be remembered forever, whether it was posted by themselves or by others, I agree with Google in this dispute: French law is wrong, people do not have a right to be forgotten that would allow a government to dictate to internet service providers what information they make available. Unfortunately, French law and courts were backed up by the European Court of Justice (ECJ), which is sort of like the US Supreme Court, although the ECJ left unclear exactly what its ruling in May last year actually means; in particular, it is not clear whether the ECJ's decision in favour of the French request does extend to non-French internet domains.
Another interesting twist in this is that if Google were to comply with the French court's demand, it would almost certainly be breaking the US Constitution's very strong protection for free speech, including the right to peacefully state honestly held opinions that many people, even an entire society, find deeply offensive. In the US, you can pretty much say what you think, even such idiocy as that Obama, the head of state, is not a native born American, or that he's Muslim!
_______________________________________
My question is:
Do people have a "right to be forgotten" by the internet as described that should be legally enforceable?
But lots of other possible questions, both Yes/No questions and information questions, occurred to me as I was writing this, and you might like to share your ideas on any those in a comment. And if someone's comment interests you for any reason, reply to it. And you can reply to replies in a discussion.
__________
Reference
Very post modern world problem. Where is the line between privacy and public interest? How far can we protect our privacy, since the emergence of NSA surveillence leaks?
ReplyDeleteGood example. Although what he did was illegal, I think Snowden's actions in revealing what the US government's NSA had been doing were morally right.
DeleteWhat do you think? Were his criminal acts the right thing to do?
yep, he was morally right even illegal. We all live in the 21st century freedom of expression should exist around the world ,especially in the country who invented the internet, not only in my country.
DeleteAnd in today's BBC News yet another interesting twist is added to the battles about data use and privacy:
ReplyDeleteKelion, L. (2015, September 23). Facebook privacy campaign advances after EU court opinion. BBC News. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-34336111.
I agree with you that people have right to do everything that doesn't threaten the other; hence, the post, searching or any data isn't a person discredit - I mean a negative rumor not a fact that damage reputation of someone or something especially in business field.
ReplyDeleteI'm quite sure that any searching or posting which is a kind of negative criticizing without evidences (everything from the user's imagination) and make a person be blamed or affect to person's life in anyway will be forced the posting to delete by current law, so it's not necessary to deprive freedom of social media using from the user.
The arguments over the "right to be forgotten" date back to 2009, when a Spanish man wanted links to true records of his earlier history removed. After a series of appeals to higher courts, in 2014, the European Court of Justice ruled in the man's favour (see D. Streitfeld, The New York Times, may 13, 2014).
DeleteHe argued that the links did threaten or harm him, since they revealed a distant past that must affect how people react to him today. So, I'm not sure whether Poy's idea that "people have right to do everything that doesn't threaten the other" means that she agrees with Europe's highest court or not.
As so often, I thought it might help to clarify the issues here to think of some specific examples. What have you, or friends (real or imaginary), done where you might like the benefits of a legally enforced "right to be forgotten"?
ReplyDeleteDo your own examples convince you?