Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Wouldn't that create a perverse incentive to get arrested for something if you want the thing to be forgotten? I doubt it - if you were never convicted, you can probably sue the ones retelling the story for defamation. > Or are we forced to not talk about ANYTHING bad that happened more than x number of years ago? The whole 'right to be forgotten' thing is not even about forcing people not to talk about something.…
Yes, that situation would suck, but you can’t use the law to stop people reminding you of things you did. Not every bad situation can be fixed by laws, not without creating even worse problems.
Why not? In public places people are generally free to go where they want, but stalking is still illegal (in most jurisdictions that I am aware of). Has outlawing stalking led to even worse problems? I don't believe it has. I don't believe giving people who are not public figures the right to not have their names associated with certain search results concerning things many years in the past is going to lead to "even worse problems" (which?).
Note that a 'right to be forgotten'-like judgment was made in the USA in 1931 in Melvin v. Reid, and I don't think it has led to "even worse problems". Perhaps you could be more specific about the problems you foresee?