W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-privacy@w3.org > October to December 2012

Re: search engines: right to be forgotten, sitemap.xml proposed solution

From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 14:42:18 -0800
Message-id: <A0A932FA-D3D0-4B0E-A567-F8A6F2922FEC@apple.com>
To: Public Privacy <public-privacy@w3.org>

On Dec 13, 2012, at 14:32 , Karl Dubost <karld@opera.com> wrote:

> 
> Le 14 déc. 2012 à 04:11, David Singer a écrit :
>> OK, but…if I saw you in the pharmacy yesterday, surely I have the 'right' to 'remember' my own observations, no?
> 
> yes

OK, stop there.  That's a yes.

> and it's fine, because 
> 
> * it's only the few people around who have seen me
> * it's likely you will forget me

Perhaps I made a mental note, as it was a strange place for such an encounter

> * it's likely that you don't know who I am

Perhaps I had already met you

> * it's likely that you will not sell to someone else my personal information or at least at any scale which is critical

Perhaps I bumped into a colleague from Opera and happened to say I saw you there

> * it's likely that you will share it with only a few people in a way which will not be identical to your experience.

These are nuances now, and you are answering from a practical point of view, that it doesn't matter much.  OK, I get that.  But you don't have control over the nuances, so why should variations in the nuances give you control over the base data?

I am asking a formal question: what rights do [I | anyone | a corporation] have to retain information which is both true and legitimately acquired?  Exactly why do you have the right to tell me to forget something?

> All these *little* nuances have very strong consequences for the social glue.


True, but I am still trying to find the principles underlying these questions.


Don't get me wrong, I also react very negatively to the surveillance society, but the principles here do puzzle me.  What we seem to be saying is that we always had these principles, but in physical life we didn't bother to exercise them much because of things like the nuances you mention above. Is that really true? For example, I seem to recall that truth is a defense to a libel action.

David Singer
Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Thursday, 13 December 2012 22:42:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 13 December 2012 22:42:47 GMT