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

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#71

Post by seszett » Wed, Jul 02, 2014, 8:47 PM UTC

cwyers wrote: post #18

lclarkmichalek wrote: post #14

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.

> I don't really see how it would be contempt of court

Well I do, and I can guarantee you that courts would see it too. In Europe, laws generally aren't to be interpreted by the letter. You can't game them with technicalities (well it depends, but in this case it's quite clear).

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#72

Post by cwyers » Wed, Jul 02, 2014, 8:55 PM UTC

seszett wrote: post #71

cwyers wrote: post #18

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.

> I don't really see how it would be contempt of court Well I do, and I can guarantee you that courts would see it too. In Europe, laws generally aren't to be interpreted by the letter. You can't game them with technicalities (well it depends, but in this case it's quite clear).

Well then explain it to me. Google.com still shows the listings. Is that contempt of court?

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#73

Post by arrrg » Wed, Jul 02, 2014, 8:55 PM UTC

CodeMage wrote: post #40

I'm sorry if I'm being naive, but can someone explain to me why everyone blames EU for this? I mean, the motivation behind the ruling seems to be a very good one. So what am I missing?

The path to hell is paved with good intentions.

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#74

Post by brownbat » Wed, Jul 02, 2014, 8:56 PM UTC

Should Google try to interpret the ruling as closely as possible, only blocking the most clearly irrelevant information, and honoring requests for appeals from journalists whenever possible? That would limit damage to those seeking information, but risk another turn at the courts.

Or should they just implement it as broadly and bluntly as possible, lowering their risk of noncompliance, reducing their costs of evaluating each case, while increasing the chance that people will start to grasp the negative consequences they argued about to the court?

Despite the near term harms, if we're worried more about the long run, there's a case to be made for the latter...

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#75

Post by RexRollman » Wed, Jul 02, 2014, 8:57 PM UTC

What I want to know is, if you are searching from outside the EU, is the info also censored? Or does it affect everyone?

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#76

Post by seszett » Wed, Jul 02, 2014, 9:04 PM UTC

cwyers wrote: post #72

seszett wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't really see how it would be contempt of court Well I do, and I can guarantee you that courts would see it too. In Europe, laws generally aren't to be interpreted by the letter. You can't game them with technicalities (well it depends, but in this case it's quite clear).

Well then explain it to me. Google.com still shows the listings. Is that contempt of court?

It's not, as long as the European sites don't show them, because the court is well aware that it doesn't have jurisdiction outside the EU.

It's really not complicated.

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#77

Post by lnanek2 » Wed, Jul 02, 2014, 9:09 PM UTC

kjjw wrote: post #39

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…

Interesting to think that it is in Google's interest to create a clumsy system that does not properly check requested deletions. Too many deletions that have no merit under the scheme will likely create a backlash, placing a negative highlight on the scheme to the average person on the street who will now start to read news article after news article about erroneous deletions. What the EU is trying to do is likely im…

It doesn't make any business sense to do it any other way. Checking if requests are valid costs money. Following requests blindly costs almost nothing, just a single internet page is lost out of millions. Google makes money off the long tail of advertising, a huge amount that flies under the radar of personal wine and dine deals. They know very well they can't afford to check every request personally.

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#78

Post by exbbc » Wed, Jul 02, 2014, 9:18 PM UTC

Indeed it is clumsy because the media is exempt of this ruling.

Which makes me suspect this was an easy way of drawing some media attention, and spreading misinformation.

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#79

Post by cwyers » Wed, Jul 02, 2014, 9:24 PM UTC

seszett wrote: post #76

cwyers wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well then explain it to me. Google.com still shows the listings. Is that contempt of court?

It's not, as long as the European sites don't show them, because the court is well aware that it doesn't have jurisdiction outside the EU. It's really not complicated.

Well that was my entire point: that Google was doing everything it could to fight the EU's "right to be forgotten" short of simply deciding (like they did with China) to stop operating a search engine in EU's jurisdiction.

Re: Why has Google cast me into oblivion?

#80

Post by TeMPOraL » Wed, Jul 02, 2014, 9:31 PM UTC

dap wrote: post #67

kjjw wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting to think that it is in Google's interest to create a clumsy system that does not properly check requested deletions. Too many deletions that have no merit under the scheme will likely create a backlash, placing a negative highlight on the scheme to the average person on the street who will now start to read news article after news article about erroneous deletions. What the EU is trying to do is likely im…

> For example, I fully expect a modern society to give a second chance to a difficult teenager that receives a criminal record. They could do that by avoiding judgment on a teenager with a critical record rather than not pretending like that record doesn't exist. And if the problem is that too many people are judging, then it's not true that society at large really does feel the same way about it. Give people facts,…

Can't upvote this enough. I see that EU (and in wider sense, many private advocates wrt. discussions about Facebook, et al.) wants to go the way of denying and removing facts, which is both hurtful for the society and not going to work anyway.

The real problem are not teenager's criminal record or photos from drunk partying - the problem are the people who judge others by things like that, many of which are done by everyone else anyway. And if this is the majority of people, maybe we should finally admit that this is a society-wide problem.