Now Google Must Censor Search Results About "Right To Be Forgotten" Removals

Mark Wilson writes, drolly, that the so-called right to be forgotten "has proved somewhat controversial," and expands on that with a new twist in a post at Beta News: While some see the requirement for Google to remove search results that link to pages that contain information about people that is 'inadequate, irrelevant or no longer relevant' as a win for privacy, other see it as a form of censorship. To fight back, there have been a number of sites that have started to list the stories Google is forced to stop linking to. In the latest twist, Google has now been ordered to remove links to contemporary news reports about the stories that were previously removed from search results. All clear? Thought not... The Information Commissioner's Office has ordered Google to remove from search results links to nine stories about other search result links removed under the Right to Be Forgotten rules.

Comments

oh boy here we go.

[nimbius]

6 years from now I fully expect a slashdot article highlighting googles mandatory censorship of the censorship of the right to have the right to forget about forgetting the forgotten.

does a set of all sets include itself?

Re:oh boy here we go.

[lgw]

This really seems like something straight from the Ministry of Truth. Throw anything that discredits the ruling party right down the memory hole, along with any future references to it and any references to the fact that something was censored. I guess "Information Commissioner's Office" is the new MiniTrue?

Re:oh boy here we go.

[msauve]

What about Google's right to forget to censor search results?

Re:oh boy here we go.

[FranTaylor]

What about Google's right to forget to censor search results?

we forgot about it

Sorry

[Anonymous Coward]

As a citizen of the EU I will say that I'm so so sorry about this mess. We if anyone should know better.

Search engines search. It's what they do.

[GrantRobertson]

This is ridiculous. If the content is still out there, then Google, and all other search engines should index it. I can see asking them to not cache it, but to use stro,g-arm tactics to FORCE them to actively filter it out of results is, to my mind, a violation of their freedom of speech. Which SHOULD trump the freedom to F up and then hide it from the public.

Google and MS and all the other search engines should just threaten to pull out of the EU en mass rather than abide by this rediculous law.

Re:Search engines search. It's what they do.

[Jason Levine]

This is ridiculous. If the content is still out there, then Google, and all other search engines should index it. I can see asking them to not cache it, but to use stro,g-arm tactics to FORCE them to actively filter it out of results is, to my mind, a violation of their freedom of speech. Which SHOULD trump the freedom to F up and then hide it from the public.

Exactly. Let's say that you actually had a right to be forgotten which superseded my freedom of speech to talk about events you'd rather everyone forget about. Only saying "Google can't link to this" isn't taking the content down. Shouldn't the law have some sort of cease and desist order built into it so that you could send me a letter saying "Take that blog post down now or else" and then be able to sue me if I didn't? Then, once the page was down, Google (and other search engines) would naturally remove the links from their databases.

Re:Search engines search. It's what they do.

[Crashmarik]

The EU really doesn't grok freedom of speech

Re:Search engines search. It's what they do.

[CaptainDork]

That model lady in Spain covered that. Her likeness was used at porn sites as a lure. She never did porn.

She demanded that Google allow searches of her that linked to professional or promotional content, but that Google block any listings that went to porn sites.

Google told her to fuck off and go after the individual porn sites that were using her likeness without her permission.

She said there were too many sites and she couldn't afford it.

Re:Could have its uses

[sconeu]

Who's willing to join me on a Right-to-be-forgotten campaign about the f***ing Kardashians?

Re:Could have its uses

[Rei]

For the longest time I seriously just assumed it had something to do with Star Trek - until the increasingly strange-sounding headlines I randomly stumbled across threw that assumption out the door.

I could google it, but rather than doing that (as that'd be too easy), I'm going to guess: Aren't they those type of people who are famous just for being famous?

Monty Python meets 1984

[TWX]

We apologise for the fault in the censored search results. Those responsible have been sacked.

We apologise again for the fault in the censored search results. Those responsible for sacking the people who have just been sacked have been sacked.

The directors of the firm hired to continue the censored search results after the other people had been sacked, wish it to be known that they have just been sacked. The censored search results have been completed in an entirely different style at great expense and at the last minute.

Those silly Europeans

[Ol Olsoc]

"Day by day and almost minute by minute the past was brought up to date. In this way every prediction made by the Party could be shown by documentary evidence to have been correct; nor was any item of news, or any expression of opinion, which conflicted with the needs of the moment, ever allowed to remain on record. All history was a palimpsest, scraped clean and reinscribed exactly as often as was necessary.”

“If the Party could thrust its hand into the past and say of this or that event, it never happened—that, surely, was more terrifying than mere torture and death.”

Looks like George Orwell was spot on.

Then again Oldthinkers unbellyfeel EU right?