Slashdot Mirror
Academics Call For Greater Transparency About Google's Right To Be Forgotten
Mark Wilson writes: Just yesterday Google revealed that it rejects most Right To Be Forgotten requests it receives. In publishing yet another transparency report, the search giant will have hoped to have put to bed any questions that users and critics may have had. While the report may have satisfied some, it did not go anywhere near far enough for one group of academics. A total of 80 university professors, law experts and technology professionals have written an open letter to Google demanding greater transparency. The letter calls upon the company to reveal more about how Right To Be Forgotten requests are handled so that the public is aware of the control that is being exerted over "readily accessible information."
Firstly, it's not actually the "right to be forgotten", that's something else that the EU is still working on. This is just data protection laws that have existed since the mid 90s and some even earlier.
The problem is generally not stuff people put online themselves. If you go to a credit agency for information about someone it will be reasonably current and comply with all relevant laws. If you go to Google you might get a 15 year old story about charges made, which fails to mention that they were later dropped.
Google could try to become a better search engine to avoid these issues, but instead is just doing link removal. Note that the links are only removed when searching for the individuals name, not for any other search terms.
Americans are obsessed with the " no interference " part of freedom, but in the EU we also value the " fair chance to prosper " part. If you went bankrupt 20 years ago that shouldn't blight your life now if you have reformed, otherwise we might as well just brand people with a hot iron and be honest about never forgiving and forgetting mistakes.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
In the EU credit reports can't mention bankruptcies over a certain age, by law. Some crimes can't be mentioned after a certain period of time either.
Internet literacy or not, some companies and managers will reject anyone with an excessively negative internet presence because they fear how it could make them look.
Let me ask you something. Is there anything that could be forgiven and forgotten in your eyes? Any kind of mistake. Of you want people to be young and not wrapped in cotton wool, you have to allow them to make mistakes and to fail, and to move on from that without it blighting the rest of their lives.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC