
“The European court found that people have the right to ask for information to be removed from search results that include their names if it is ‘inadequate, irrelevant or no longer relevant, or excessive’. In deciding what to remove search engines must also have regard to the public interest. These are, of course, very vague and subjective tests. The court also decided that search engines don’t qualify for a ‘journalistic exception’. The examples we’ve seen so far: former politicians wanting posts removed that criticise their policies in office; serious, violent criminals asking for articles about their crimes to be deleted; bad reviews for professionals like architects and teachers; comments that people now regret.”
Related posts:
Worldwide unemployment hits new high
Wary of China, Companies Head to Cambodia
56-year-old lover of married Taiwanese man faces 298 years in jail
Brewer says his just-add-water beer mix tastes 'just as good' as the original
Snowden files reveal NSA spied on Brazil and Mexico presidents
St. Paul to pay $50K to man who claimed police assaulted him
NSA promises transparency by launching new Tumblr blog
Ukraine Pledges to Protect Bank Deposits as Kiev Rally Called
IRS’s Shulman had more public White House visits than any Cabinet member
After IRS Targeting, Now The Gibson Guitar Raids Make Sense
Oklahoma state legislator introduces bill to banish NSA
'Liberty Dollar' Creator Awaits His Fate Behind Bars
U.S. has lost sight of $70 billion in cash sent to Afghanistan [2011]
Fast food CEO: How govt regulation is driving us abroad
India central bank red flags 'virtual currency'