Orogogus wrote on Nov 27, 2014, 13:32:
This is exactly like China, or any other country. A company doing business in a foreign country usually has to abide by the laws of both. You tried to blame this situation on the US courts, which is absurd, and then on Google, which isn't much better. As far as I can tell, most US citizens think the EU law falls on the wrong side of censorship, and would not be behind Google if it abandoned our principles for yours. It's a bad place for Google, and I suppose if the EU pushes hard enough that they'll have to get out like they did with China. I just think it's weird that you're acting like the EU has nothing to do with this and it's everyone else's "fault."

US law does not apply in the EU

And German laws don't apply to German companies operating in China? I don't think this has been answered.

Laws always apply to a corporation where it does business. That it also has to follow laws of it's "home" country is obviously a problem for that company but as part of EU a company has to follow national law, EU law and the law of whatever country it does business. There are ways to do company structure to spread this out so that what happens in a country is only relevant to that countries laws ;p But that's why I say US courts fucked it up and why I said google fucked it up. Google could have created another company from scratch for Europe, licensed search algo to that company and have ZERO ties to the US... it choose to argue it's existing structure instead of adapting. The courts decided that google has to give European data to US agencies. Which is, by the way, illegal in the EU.. meaning Google can not follow this US court decision without facing the harshest of harshest legal counter the EU has (Splitting of a company in a US and EU company)

Frankly speaking, to the EU it is completely irrelevant what the US laws are for an US company ,) When the EU says google is not allowed to give the US the european data then that is a fact. It is unchanging. Google does it, google will be crushed.

And to be more frank. Google getting out of the EU? That's a good joke ;p The EU can split Google in 2 companies if it does not comply. Then we will have 2 google companies...

And btw, you should really google that US court decision. ;p
Even if it doesn't really have a lot to do with the right to be forgotten. Google has ignored EU calls for better protection of privacy and this law is the result. But the US courts made it so google CAN not do anything BUT ignore the EU laws for better privacy.

And so we come to the situation we have now.. it's a clusterfuck. And the only way this could be any worse is if Google were an Russian company. ;p

This comment was edited on Nov 27, 2014, 14:36.

This is exactly like China, or any other country. A company doing business in a foreign country usually has to abide by the laws of both. You tried to blame this situation on the US courts, which is absurd, and then on Google, which isn't much better. As far as I can tell, most US citizens think the EU law falls on the wrong side of censorship, and would not be behind Google if it abandoned our principles for yours. It's a bad place for Google, and I suppose if the EU pushes hard enough that they'll have to get out like they did with China. I just think it's weird that you're acting like the EU has nothing to do with this and it's everyone else's "fault."

US law does not apply in the EU

And German laws don't apply to German companies operating in China? I don't think this has been answered.

Orogogus wrote on Nov 27, 2014, 12:47:
Orwell was concerned about privacy from the government, which I don't think this affects. But if you're going to protect privacy, call it that. "Protecting" data by erasing it, obfuscating it and limiting access to it is classic doublespeak. Down the memory hole it goes.

Still curious, though -- are German companies operating overseas not bound by German laws? Is the general European attitude that companies who want to work in, say, China, should just set up a separate company, stepping outside their EU jurisdiction, and do things the PRC way? I mean, EU, whatever, but if Google set up a separate Chinese company and handed over everything the Communist government asked for they'd get tons of shit in the US.

Privacy is privacy ,)

Either way, it's a huge clusterfuck. But the simple principle applies. You do business in the EU, you follow EU laws, you don't follow EU laws, EU will fuck you over so badly you wish you did.

US law does not apply in the EU

And the EU is not like China. But if you want to do business in China you have no choice but to cooperate with a local Chinese company and thus you are bound to their laws. (There is no free market in China)

Orwell was concerned about privacy from the government, which I don't think this affects. But if you're going to protect privacy, call it that. "Protecting" data by erasing it, obfuscating it and limiting access to it is classic doublespeak. Down the memory hole it goes.

Still curious, though -- are German companies operating overseas not bound by German laws? Is the general European attitude that companies who want to work in, say, China, should just set up a separate company, stepping outside their EU jurisdiction, and do things the PRC way? I mean, EU, whatever, but if Google set up a separate Chinese company and handed over everything the Communist government asked for they'd get tons of shit in the US.

Orogogus wrote on Nov 27, 2014, 00:02:

eRe4s3r wrote on Nov 26, 2014, 23:00:
Google basically had to eat this judgement and the results because the US courts made it illegal for GOOGLE to actually follow the EU laws.

Hence my saying this is something the US courts caused

Wait, so German laws don't apply to German companies operating out of the country?

EDIT: I have to say that "data protection" is one of the more Orwellian terminologies I've heard in recent years. Privacy is well and good, but this is the opposite of protecting data.

It is protecting privacy through laws on data, the opposite of Orwell

How laws work in a world where borders are at best lines someone paints on maps (or where Putin invades and/or annexes land willy nilly) is something to argue about. When you get down to it, Google has brought this upon itself by not splitting EU business into a separate EU company.

eRe4s3r wrote on Nov 26, 2014, 23:00:
Google basically had to eat this judgement and the results because the US courts made it illegal for GOOGLE to actually follow the EU laws.

Hence my saying this is something the US courts caused

Wait, so German laws don't apply to German companies operating out of the country?

EDIT: I have to say that "data protection" is one of the more Orwellian terminologies I've heard in recent years. Privacy is well and good, but this is the opposite of protecting data.

This comment was edited on Nov 27, 2014, 00:22.

mixma242 wrote on Nov 26, 2014, 22:45:
And eRe4s3r, what is the stance of the German Pirate Party on the 'right to be forgotten' - does the party support or condemn it?

That's a good question actually, but I fear completely irrelevant, the Pirate Party is defacto dead in Germany (sub 1%)

But to answer it anyway, it warned that the judgement while protecting privacy rights of EU citizen also created a legal loophole for censorship, and that any not yet encountered misuse should be swiftly blocked off via addendum to the law.

At the core this law is by the way, not the right to be forgotten.. that's just how the media calls it. The judgement defined that an US company doing business in the EU has to abide to EU data protection laws. And if it does not, it will face SEVERE punishments. Google basically had to eat this judgement and the results because the US courts made it illegal for GOOGLE to actually follow the EU laws.

Hence my saying this is something the US courts caused

To explain to you why Germany is such a big pusher of this, in Germany Google has a ~95% market share. Yes, you read right. Partially because google is really superior to all other search engines in German, and secondly because Firefox came with google by default, and Firefox is also very popular in Germany

Ps.: And yes, this does apply to ALL companies not just google. Not just to search engines either.

And eRe4s3r, what is the stance of the German Pirate Party on the 'right to be forgotten' - does the party support or condemn it?

Wow, I wonder if the EU has hired censors from China. How does this work - if the EU wants information to be scrubbed from the Internet globally then on what basis can Google say no to the same demand from China, the US, Russia, Thailand, Iran and so on. Also I haven't seen a lot of information about the EU trying to impose these rules on other companies. Technically the rules apply to other companies but has it been applied in the real world (have the others been getting the same requests as Google or just a fraction)?

Finally, I think it's pathetic that some dude who lives in Germany would try and lay the blame for this at the feet of the US judicial system. Grow a pair and take responsibility for your own nations actions.

garrywong wrote on Nov 26, 2014, 13:15:
Wow, so America isn't the only one that thinks it can impose its own laws outside its borders?

And the best part is this is something the US courts in their infinite idiocy enabled. By saying that US companies operating in the EU have to abide to US laws even if those laws are something that is illegal in the EU has now a legal stand for that applying in reverse.

Wow, so America isn't the only one that thinks it can impose its own laws outside its borders?

Oops: After Threatening Hacker With 440 Years, Prosecutors Settle for a Misdemeanor.

Thankfully he didn't kill himself first under the pressure of such a threat.