back to article Right To Be Forgotten in the US: Americans wanna be like EU-oo-oo, says watchdog

The US should be more like Europe – and introduce the controversial "right to be forgotten" ruling – says a top American consumer-defending organisation. In a letter to Google CEO Larry Page and exec chairman Eric Schmidt, Consumer Watchdog asked the search supremos to extend the EU's privacy ruling, dubbed the "right to be …

  1. Ragarath
    Joke

    Follow in our footsteps

    That's right you USians, follow in the footsteps of us Bri...err..Europeans as always ;)

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Follow in our footsteps

      No, we want something stronger than that weak Euro crap

      1. Triggerfish
        Joke

        Re: Follow in our footsteps

        What like a constitution? Hows that working?

        1. Fungus Bob

          Re: Follow in our footsteps

          Good enough for government work...

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Oh goody

    I can't wait until that policy applies to the likes of Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax...and the NSA, CIA, and IRS, although I'd prefer not to have it apply to my employers' accounting department or my bank.

    edited to add that last bit.

    1. tom dial Silver badge

      Re: Oh goody

      Retention and publication restrictions already cover the organizations named.

      - Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax are governed by a number of laws and civil court decisions, including a legal requirement to drop information after a period of time.

      - The IRS, as I understand it, ignores information over about three years old unless they find evidence of fraud, in which case the effective period is indefinite.

      - For the NSA, the legal retention is 5 years or less for nearly everything and generally 0 for US person information, although that obviously conflicts to a degree with retention of communication information between a US person and a foreigner. The FISA and USSID 18 rules are quite specific in this area.

      - The CIA is expected to pass to the FBI or maybe, now, DHS, any material pertinent to US persons or activities; for the latter agencies I would expect the rules for criminal investigations and proceedings to apply.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Oh goody

        Ok, you csn pick up your commission check now.

        Also. can you have those orgs define those words for me.

      2. ecofeco Silver badge

        Re: Oh goody

        Tom, thanks for the laugh.

        Good one. Good one. Now pull my other one.

  3. ukgnome
    Trollface

    Hey USA

    If you wanna be more like us it's not too late to embrace the union.

  4. James 51

    "but does not mention early teething problems that saw fair and accurate news reports de-listed due to things said in the comments sections."

    But only the journalists were notified that their stories were being delisted from the search. It was almost like Google was trying to stir up resentment....

    1. Daggerchild Silver badge

      Has anyone ever actually nailed down that 'only journalists got told'/Google-secret-PR thing, coz when I look, I see things like this instead:

      http://searchengineland.com/google-notifying-publishers-right-forgotten-removals-195634

      i.e. if you tell it who to tell, it tells you, unconditionally, automatically.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Nobody's articles are being delisted under "right to be forgotten" rules. The only thing that Google changes in the results returned in response to a search for a users name. The articles will still turn up in response to thousands of other search terms.

      Google changes the results that are returned for different search terms all the time, and it makes no effort to alert the owners of pages that are affected by such changes - in fact it steadfastly denies that it is has any responsibility to businesses that may suffer significant financial loss when a tweak by google changes the response to specific search terms. It is only alerting people about changes due to "right to be forgotten" changes because it is making those changes under duress, and it wants to stir up support for it's opposition to this ruling.

  5. tom dial Silver badge

    I do not know whether Google (Yahoo!, Bing) would be misclassified in the US as "publishers", but suspect it would make little difference, as restriction of the right to publish true information here is quite difficult to get and therefore quite exceptional. Notable instances are classified government documents and copyrighted material, and occasionally court proceedings and documents are suppressed for a time. The idea of deleting or delisting "outdated or no longer relevant" information is alien, as is the curious notion that unpopular ideas like white supremacy or holocaust denial could be regulated or suppressed. The idea that official and public actions of a government body, like that taken against Mario Costeja Gonzalez in Spain, could be ordered "forgotten" is, in the context of the first amendment, preposterous.

    If anything, we err in the other direction, as in assigning "sexual predator" labels that are legally required to remain public for long periods or permanently for the life of the assignee.

  6. ecofeco Silver badge

    LOLZ! Rights?!

    If there is any single proof required to show just how stupid Americans are, it is the fact they still think they have rights and those are superior to other countries.

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Never

    Never tell the Internet who you are.

    Never.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like