[NovaS1X]

I'll try and explain it in my point of view from an event that happened to me.

I was doing a job interview when I was younger and it was going well. I got scheduled in for a second interview. Right before my second interview I got a call from the manager saying that they didn't want to hire me. I asked why and he said this "I was taking a look at your Twitter profile and saw that you were holding a gun". What actually was going on here was my profile picture was me holding a paintball gun with my friends from a weekend event a month before. I was told that they don't want people with my image as a part of the company. (this is a whole conversation in itself but I'll leave it here).

So after this I went and removed my picture. Done deal; problem solved.

Now, what If I didn't have the option of removing that picture? This was my personal profile. This was MY information. Would it hurt future job prospects? What if someone posted revenge porn or myself (no this doesn't exists online or anywhere else). What if I went through a goth phase in high-school and a potential employer or volunteer organization didn't like it. There are many, many scenarios like this. Some of which end very very badly for people, and others just very annoying.

The point here is that there is permanence on the internet but individuals change. And as an individual I should have the right to remove that information. In the modern world it's not realistic to ask "just keep everything offline". I fear for my eventual children who will do what kids do and will have that stuck with them for their entire lives. I'm very happy that nobody can Google what I did when I was 12.

The blinds analogy highlights the idea that behind those blinds we have(had) photo albums, journals, arguments, phases of life, conversations, and skeletons in our closet that we had control over. Today we no longer have control over that information (and stay culturally relevant in any context) and top it off with the horrendous privacy records of companies like Google and Facebook that drive our lives I think we have the right to have laws like this.

[superuser2]

>And as an individual I should have the right to remove that information.

Information that you published, sure, but the "right to be forgotten" is about what other people published about you, and your inconvenience does not trump those other people's rights.

When a news story about you is inconvenient and damaging to your reputation is when it matters most that it stay online and reachable.

[NovaS1X]

Yes. I agree. That's exactly what I've been arguing for. Maybe you should read my many arguments in this topic again. I'm arguing against people claiming that this will be used for taking down of news articles and censorship. I thing those things are bad. I'm talking about online harassment, shaming, and public information detrimental to the individual that was posted by that individual or others in attempt to harass out of spite. I'm not arguing legitimate news articles should be censored. I strongly believe in freedom of the press and speech.

There's a difference between whistle blowing/journalism and harassment and public shaming. We're not in the dark ages anymore.

[Buge]

Well the company might have been upset that you willingly used that picture as the most accurate description of yourself. If it was a picture that someone else posted of you, they might have been less upset.

Also, even without right to be forgotten, you could legally compel people to take down the picture, and google to delist the picture via DMCA request assuming you or someone you are friends with took the picture.