Skip to main content

Erasing / purging past data (that is, records)




 Erasing or purging things from the past - records or whatever - may be convenient to some, but opens a discussion on the propriety of doing so.      A case in point is the ruling by the EU's highest Court requiring Google to delete an entry on its server.   Probably appropriate in the instant case, but where to draw the line

"The European Union’s highest court issued a tough verdict Tuesday that could be a boon to privacy, but a loss to free access to information—and the business model of companies such as Google and Facebook.

A Spanish man argued that an old debt from 1998 should not follow him every time his name is punched into a Google search. The court agreed, and said Google (and other companies, by implication) would have to purge links to such information if certain conditions were met. Consumers would ostensibly have to go to “the competent authorities” (whomever those are) in order to have their rights enforced. The court may have been deliberately vague in order to allow the EU’s constituent nations the right to figure out enforcement. Basically, though, it’s a big slap in the face of Google, which now has to intentionally make its core product—making all the world’s information easily searchable—worse. At least for one continent. Also, there’s no potential for appeal.

You can, and Google did, make the free speech argument. What if, for example, Bill Clinton asks Google to purge all references to his affair with Monica Lewinsky?

There’s another wrinkle. Many of the Internet’s biggest corporations make their fortunes selling ads against the personal data they collect from their users. To what extent can Google’s users, at least in Europe, now ask to be purged from its databases?

The Los Angeles Times reports that Europe has a more pronounced expectation of privacy, which might conflict with the United States’ strong notions of free speech and a free press. It will be interesting to see this tug of war play out over the next few years.

In the meantime, don’t expect Google to pull its stakes out of Europe. There’s money on the table, and it’s not going away anytime soon because one Spaniard will finally know peace."

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...
Post a Comment
Read more

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...
Post a Comment
Read more

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...
6 comments
Read more