Msg#: 4549590 posted 8:52 pm on Feb 27, 2013 (gmt 0)
In a blog post published on the day of the hearing, Google's Head of Free Expression for Europe, the Middle East and Africa William Echikson emphasised that it stands by the right to public access of information that is "valid, legal content" -- which a newspaper notice on a property auction is in Spain.
"There are clear societal reasons why this kind of information should be publicly available," continues Echikson. "People shouldn't be prevented from learning that a politician was convicted of taking a bribe, or that a doctor was convicted of malpractice. The substantive question before the Court today is whether search engines should be obliged to remove links to valid legal material that still exists online. We believe the answer to that question is no." It is a fair argument, that any form of selectively removing information could lead to a whole series of similar demands, demands which may convulute real privacy law and be used to afford those in power with unwarranted protection. It's also a scaremongering tactic on Google's part. Google At EU Court: The Public Should Have Access to "valid, legal content" [wired.co.uk]