21–30 of 152 posts
The EU really is a joke. I think if people want to hide stuff like revenge porn, or obvious slander, then fair enough. But unindexing legitimate journalism is stupid.
The difficulty with following that logic is in the blurry middle area. Where is the line drawn and who makes that decision?
The EU really is a joke. I think if people want to hide stuff like revenge porn, or obvious slander, then fair enough. But unindexing legitimate journalism is stupid.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
This will lead people to point out that they can go to the city library and look at the back issue of the newspaper and it won't be censored there. And that will lead to the question of what is, and what is not, the public record and what sort of damage to that record is tolerated in the interest of justice.
The EU really is a joke. I think if people want to hide stuff like revenge porn, or obvious slander, then fair enough. But unindexing legitimate journalism is stupid.
Following the law is a joke? I may not like the law, but I rather like that Google does not get to be above it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
The court ordered Google Inc to remove certain listings. They did not specify "only on certain TLDs" or "only from certain servers." Including them in search results is violating the court order. I guess if Google pulled out of the EU entirely, closing all European subsidiaries, relocating employees and removing all assets, then they could make a case that the court no longer has jurisdiction... that seems like it'd…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
In Europe they're more serious about the concept of "spirit of the law". Particularly when circumvention is used as a route around a ruling.
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
Google is going to slowly be asked to forget all of Europe, including the holocaust (since this is a stain on the families involved).
This will cause a backlash against "erasing European history"
And then they will repeal this.
All through this, Google will be the villain, not the ding-dongs running the EU.