[icebraining]

There's no scenario where they can respond to the vast scale of GDPR violations that their archive likely represents, when it comes to manually removing content.

"GDPR violations". What's that, exactly? As far as I know, you only have to remove personal data upon request, no preemptively. So I don't see how they are "violations".

Will a lot of people make these requests? Possibly, but where's the evidence of that? People have been able to use copyright takedown requests (e.g. under the DMCA) forever, yet the Archive is still around.

[tankenmate]

Actually the recommended data handling says you should specifically state the purpose for needing the data, and that it should be reasonably limited to that need; i.e. if you don't need it any more you should pro-actively delete it.[0]

[0]https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/documents/1475/de... Pages 4-6

[drchaos]

They do have a legitimate interest (in the sense of article 6(1) of the GDPR), namely providing an internet archive.

[tankenmate]

I would agree in the case of the wayback machine they have a very strong case under article 6(1).