EU Court ruling opens the door for net censorship

[DrMA]

BBC News - EU court backs 'right to be forgotten' in Google case

«The European Union Court of Justice said links to "irrelevant" and outdated data should be erased on request.»

This, of course, means non-physical entities such as companies or governments can also request that what they unilaterally deem "outdated" or "irrelevant" ought to be removed from google search results.

So now imagine the WHO petitioning google to remove all search results on ecigs that link to Farsalinos studies because they are "irrelevant".

 

[Pyxus]

It's already happening by drowning factual (and usually positive) studies in a sea of BS...eq. "dilution effect"

Sent from my SM-N900 using Tapatalk

 

[rothenbj]

There was precedent set. Books that were deemed "irrelevant" have been burned in the past, all for the common good.

 

[Roger_Lafayette]

As I read the decision, only a natural person (i.e. not a corporation) has the right to ask that data about their own "private life" be removed. There are obviously a number of ways in which it could be problematic, even if its scope continues to be limited by these two parameters. Restricting free speech is always a messy business, apart from the authority it gives to governments.

There's another side, too. I can remember once working for a government agency that maintained public real property records. We were asked to conceal the identity of a woman who had obtained an order of protection from her stalking ex-husband, and my boss chose to voluntarily comply (meaning: without a court order). While I didn't know all the facts, it struck me as the right decision.

These issues are rarely as transparent as they may initially appear to be. (EDIT: I'm not quite sure how this applies to vaping. Not yet, anyway.)