Quote:
Originally Posted by taustin
They should (and won't) first note that the request was not honored, and that, in fact, the requester has now become the story.
|
Doesn't mean he won't sue.
Cross-border lawsuits are not unheard of.
Besides, the point he was making wasn't that he wanted the review hard to find, he wanted it deleted. Unavailable anywhere. Expunged. That's why he went to the source.
Is he wacko? Of course.
But a wacko with government backing.
Look to the Hale case: she tracked down and stalked an online reviewer who made what turned out to he valid points and expressed an honest opinion. Then she went to the (foreign) media to brag about it and paint her target as vile and biased.
Plenty more where those came from, too.
The WP is big enough to be able to afford to stand on principle but what of smaller blogs?
We already have Elora's Cave suing DEAR AUTHOR for repeating publicly available information, and that is under traditional law. Add in wacko laws and it'll be open season on reviewer and bloggers...
Most rights come with responsibilities and limits: free speech being bound by libel laws to constrain its protections to truthful facts and honest expression. Under "right to be forgotten" not even truth or facts are protected.