Why has Google cast me into oblivion? • Hacker News Board

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#11

Post by bitJericho » Wed, Jul 02, 2014, 6:33 PM UTC

cwyers wrote: post #5

personZ wrote: post #3

To be fair to Google, it opposed the European court ruling. But its implementation of it looks odd, perhaps clumsy. I find it incredible that Google is held at fault in this case because they don't choose whether it is "inadequate, irrelevant or no longer relevant" in a way that fits the author's view. Such an analysis is so absurdly subjective, and it is impossible for Google to satisfy both sides. The European Cour…

Unless Google wants to treat the EU like they did China and redirect all searches to a jurisdiction with actual press freedoms, they're doing all they can here.

Perhaps they should.

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#12

Post by bitJericho » Wed, Jul 02, 2014, 6:34 PM UTC

natosaichek wrote: post #4

I like that they told the author that his article would no longer be viewable. If that's the case, and the 'removal' is not secret, then they could (should?) totally make available a separate database of articles that people have asked to be removed. Basically, the original article may be old (or theoretically irrelevant) but the fact that someone asked for it to be removed is very new and not at all irrelevant. It w…

In fact just publish the original request alongside the notice that the search results are censored.

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#13

Post by tokenizerrr » Wed, Jul 02, 2014, 6:45 PM UTC

B-Con wrote: post #9

HNJohnC wrote: post #2

Someone needs to make a search engine that only returns results for things that people have tried to hide under this law.

Or just make it hard to find all the instances. For example, this article itself references the content in the article that was removed from search results. The effectiveness of having the original link removed is probably very minimal unless this page is also removed. Ultimately, it's a race. The "hider" has to find all the things they want hidden and explicitly list them. As long as the content spreads faster than…

It's just weird that the search engine is tasked with the removal. If other sites can legally link to the "forgotten" content - which appears to still be online - then why can't a search engine link to it? If they want this ruling to make sense at all, the removal requests should go directly to the entity hosting the content in my opinion.

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#14

Post by lclarkmichalek » Wed, Jul 02, 2014, 6:46 PM UTC

cwyers wrote: post #5

personZ wrote: post #3

To be fair to Google, it opposed the European court ruling. But its implementation of it looks odd, perhaps clumsy. I find it incredible that Google is held at fault in this case because they don't choose whether it is "inadequate, irrelevant or no longer relevant" in a way that fits the author's view. Such an analysis is so absurdly subjective, and it is impossible for Google to satisfy both sides. The European Cour…

Unless Google wants to treat the EU like they did China and redirect all searches to a jurisdiction with actual press freedoms, they're doing all they can here.

Ah, contempt of court. Always a solid tactic

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#15

Post by thegregjones » Wed, Jul 02, 2014, 6:47 PM UTC

James Ball at the Guardian has written about some of their articles that have been disappeared: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/02/eu-righ...

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#16

Post by magicalist » Wed, Jul 02, 2014, 6:47 PM UTC

natosaichek wrote: post #4

I like that they told the author that his article would no longer be viewable. If that's the case, and the 'removal' is not secret, then they could (should?) totally make available a separate database of articles that people have asked to be removed. Basically, the original article may be old (or theoretically irrelevant) but the fact that someone asked for it to be removed is very new and not at all irrelevant. It w…

The Guardian reported[1] that they were at least considering a notice at the bottom of a search result page that had a result removed, like they do with DMCA requests.

If that's the case, hopefully they can do what they do with DMCA notices, and link to a copy of the actual takedown request (which would include a link or links to what was taken down). ChillingEffects.org could start a new section for right to be forgotten requests.

On the other hand, reprinting DMCA takedown notices is protected by the First Amendment in the US, but reprinting right to be forgotten requests may be frowned upon by EU courts.

Edit: according the newer Guardian piece that thegregjones posted above, there is a warning[2], but just a "Learn more" link, no link to the actual removal request.

[1] http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jun/08/google-sea...

[2] https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BrYpLOwIgAE8pF0.jpg

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#17

Post by marti221 » Wed, Jul 02, 2014, 6:47 PM UTC

personZ wrote: post #3

To be fair to Google, it opposed the European court ruling. But its implementation of it looks odd, perhaps clumsy. I find it incredible that Google is held at fault in this case because they don't choose whether it is "inadequate, irrelevant or no longer relevant" in a way that fits the author's view. Such an analysis is so absurdly subjective, and it is impossible for Google to satisfy both sides. The European Cour…

Couldn't of said it better myself.

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#18

Post by cwyers » Wed, Jul 02, 2014, 6:48 PM UTC

lclarkmichalek wrote: post #14

cwyers wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless Google wants to treat the EU like they did China and redirect all searches to a jurisdiction with actual press freedoms, they're doing all they can here.

Ah, contempt of court. Always a solid tactic

I don't really see how it would be contempt of court for Google to shut down its European servers and redirect all its European domains to go to Google.com. It would be a lot of other things, but I don't think it would be contempt of court.

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#19

Post by magicalist » Wed, Jul 02, 2014, 6:51 PM UTC

thegregjones wrote: post #15

James Ball at the Guardian has written about some of their articles that have been disappeared: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/02/eu-righ...

This is really good and should be the top article, not the rather silly BBC piece.

Speaking of the Streisand effect, if you search for "Dougie McDonald Guardian" on google.co.uk as it suggests, the offending links are gone, but now all the top links are to stories about the offending links.

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#20

Post by Mr_P » Wed, Jul 02, 2014, 6:51 PM UTC

natosaichek wrote: post #4

I like that they told the author that his article would no longer be viewable. If that's the case, and the 'removal' is not secret, then they could (should?) totally make available a separate database of articles that people have asked to be removed. Basically, the original article may be old (or theoretically irrelevant) but the fact that someone asked for it to be removed is very new and not at all irrelevant. It w…

Perhaps we need something like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_websites_blocked_in_Chi....