What is it that a Canadian court, and El Reg's head honcho, and the rest of us, would agree is a sensible way of dealing with these issues?
The reported comments by the court seem to imply in one place that UK-style geo-blocking is the required solution, but then in another that the search results should be removed globally because, trust us, nobody could possibly disagree with what we decided in this case in Canada. And we wouldn't be nasty in less clear-cut cases, and demand global removal that would affect other peoples' rights. The problem with that, of course, is that if that approach took off then any court in any country could demand global removal - and not every court would be as scrupulous in defending third parties' rights as this particular Canadian judge.
For all its limitations I can only see that geo-blocking is a viable solution, for all it's manifest limitations. The extra-territorial way this court seems to be leaning would be ominous indeed.