French court applies Right to be forgotten globally

[fjtorres]

From ZDnet:
http://www.zdnet.com/french-right-to...tag=TRE17cfd61

The 'right to be forgotten', which came into effect this May following a ruling by the European Court of Justice, may have a bigger impact on international firms than simply encouraging search engines to stop returning outdated links in their results.

The judgement, handed down in September by the Paris Tribunal de Grande Instance, has left Google France facing a €1,000 a day fine and may pave the way for European courts to impose orders on online properties beyond their own borders. In this case, Google's French subsidiary has been fined for the actions of its US parent company.

Previously, if the complainant wanted a result removed from google.com, they would need to sue Google in the US since Google Inc controls the search engine worldwide. "Until now a subsidiary could not be legally forced under the threat of daily penalties to deliver a result which was beyond its control," Shefet is quoted as saying.

More at the source.

[pastanley]

What happens in France stays in France.

[tubemonkey]

Globally? They better have a treaty to back it up with.

[HomeInMyShoes]

I can see this leading to intellectual borders. The Internet has grown way past what it was originally intended for and I wonder if we will end up with two internets. The academic and the public. People need to take their privacy seriously. If you are stupid enough to do stuff and put it out there electronically you suffer the consequences. Just because the most popular search engine isn't returning a result does not mean that your stupidity is not living its own life out there.

[ApK]

So it's not enough that governments cover stuff up, now they are mandating that everyone has to cover stuff up?

This "right to be forgotten" sounds like something out of a heavy-handed dystopian novel.
Something thought up in Orwell's Ministry of Truth, perhaps?

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by HomeInMyShoes

People need to take their privacy seriously.

The definitions of "public" and "private" are changing--and need to IMO. Even when in my own home, I no longer have any expectation of privacy when I go online and interact publically with the rest of the world. Just as if I'd gone to a public forum in the physical world, I feel I've left the privacy of my own home whenever I engage people in virtual public forums. In order to have privacy, I need to BE private. I accept sole responsibility for guarding (or relinquishing) my privacy. I don't expect anyone to do it for me. Also ... I've discovered that I just don't value, all that much, what others are defining as "privacy" in the digital age. Security? Sure. But if I want "privacy," I'll become a hermit. Both physically and digitally.

[gbm]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

From ZDnet:
http://www.zdnet.com/french-right-to...tag=TRE17cfd61





More at the source.

Google shuts down its French subsidiary, lays off all it French workers and blocks all French IP address from accessing Google severs and services. Problem solved.

Sometimes your problem is a railroad spike and it takes a 15 pound sledgehammer to drive it in.

bernie

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by gbm

Google shuts down its French subsidiary, lays off all it French workers and blocks all French IP address from accessing Google severs and services. Problem solved.

Sometimes your problem is a railroad spike and it takes a 15 pound sledgehammer to drive it in.

bernie

I'd go for that.

France needs to learn they cannot pass binding laws on the rest of the world. That would mean they were the rest of the world, which... they aren't.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

France needs to learn they cannot pass binding laws on the rest of the world. That would mean they were the rest of the world, which... they aren't.

Do we have to go back to saying freedom fries again?

[tubemonkey]

This French ruling is just as bad as this US ruling:

US Judge orders Microsoft to hand over data stored in Ireland

I guess borders mean nothing anymore.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Do we have to go back to saying freedom fries again?

And the connection is...

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

This French ruling is just as bad as this US ruling:

US Judge orders Microsoft to hand over data stored in Ireland

I guess borders mean nothing anymore.

I would venture to say that is precisely the same thing, but for all the reasons you don't think. Over there, it is a matter of information available in both locations, which therefore is/should be legally accessible from both locations.

Here it is a matter of information legally accessible in both locations, being marked illegal in one location... and that location (France) trying to make it illegal in the other location (USA).

In both cases, we are talking about universal data, and countries trying to control how that gets used in other countries.

France tries to stop Google from handing over data via google searches, in the US.
Microsoft tries to avoid handing over data to the US Courts, in the US.

I am noticing a trend here.



(Also, Google is more of a law-abiding corporation than Microsoft is. )

[Little.Egret]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

I'd go for that.

France needs to learn they cannot pass binding laws on the rest of the world. That would mean they were the rest of the world, which... they aren't.

As noted, the US courts don't accept that rule so why should others ?

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

And the connection is...

Reaction from some quarters whenever France does something they disagree with.

Freedom fries is a political euphemism for French fries in the United States. The term came to prominence in 2003 when the then Republican Chairman of the Committee on House Administration, Bob Ney, renamed the menu item in three Congressional cafeterias in response to France's opposition to the proposed invasion of Iraq. Although originally supported with several restaurants changing their menus as well, following declining support for the Iraq War, the term fell out of use. Following Ney's resignation as Chairman, it was quietly reverted.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Reaction from some quarters whenever France does something they disagree with.

Okay, so some people are stupid.

I think it is fairly reasonable to penalize France for a stupid move by taking away the thing they are trying to control, mostly to prevent them from controlling it, also because they clearly do not appreciate that particular service. Also, Google as an independent company is perfectly welcome to pull out wherever they feel unwelcome, because they have no requirement to offer their services. Hopefully quicker than they did in China.
(I would highly disapprove of the US demanding of Google that they pull out of France. I specifically stated my approval of a suggestion that Google do so of their own volition.)

Less reasonable is doing random garbage as a form of demagoguery.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

Okay, so some people are stupid.

I found nothing stupid about that. No different than bumper stickers or buttons and the like, it was (and is) an attention-getting, mild way to show displeasure with, as Groundskeeper Willie put it, those cheese-eating surrender-monkeys.