Trivial to implement "to be forgotten" (was: Re: [governance] [IP] On Monday EPIC Freedom Awards to Allen, Amash, The Guardian, Snowden + Google right to be forgotten link

[Norbert Bollow]

John Curran <jcurran at istaff.org> wrote:

> Do any provide an answer?  I am not taking a position either
> way, just seeking to understand of how the court felt that
> relevance changing in the future should be handled...

That wasn't part of the question that the court was asked to answer.

The ruling implies only that in the kind of situation that you
describe, the ruling will stop being applicable to the situation when
the change of relevance has occurred.

That said, I'm not sure that there is a significant issue here. When
old information suddenly becomes relevant again, I'd expect that someone
who remembers it will blog about it, and that blog post would
automatically not be covered by the decision of removing specific URLs
of old documents from the search index.

Greetings,
Norbert

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t