[discuss] Applying the Right To Be Forgotten to Wikipedia

[Mwendwa Kivuva]

Historical research, case studies, and facts that make the bulk of
Wikipedia content must not be subject to the ECJ ruling. If that is
the case, Libraries might be forced to tear pages from their hard copy
encyclopedias like Britannica. That makes no sense. Remember, laws
that apply online should apply in real life and vice versa.

On 31/05/2014, Michel S. Gauthier <mg at telepresse.com> wrote:
> At 00:19 31/05/2014, Gnosis IP Law, P.C. wrote:
>>I would agree:  Wikipedia and any other information site that processes
>>personal information to which it provides links would probably be
>>considered a ³controller² subject to the right to be forgotten of European
>>citizens.  Only the first of several burdens would be that ³controllers²
>>who receive a cease and desist demand must determine whether the demander
>>is a citizen of the EU or otherwise covered.  And who must confirm?
>
> I am afraid that this is another outdated concept: processing
> information in order to build links has a name: it is called
> intelligent thinking. The EU (non voted ruling) is just another way
> to forbide the right to think.
>
> Anyway, intellition (i.e. what makes sense from communicated
> information) is burried in big data. Nothing can be forgot. It can
> only be in its own turn burried in (more positive) data. The first
> "controller" is the DNS which permits to access Google and Wikipedia,
> and actually the first first one is language.
>
> M S G
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>


-- 
______________________
Mwendwa Kivuva, Nairobi, Kenya
twitter.com/lordmwesh

The best athletes never started as the best athletes.
You have to think anyway, so why not think big? - Donald Trump.
"You miss 100 percent of the shots you never take." - Wayne Gretzky.
Tackle the biggest frog first.
I will persist until I succeed - Og Mandino.