I think this is good, I think people should be able to delete their online presence when they turn 18. The way the internet is now, it's too easy to screw up your own life.
But would you agree with it if we lived in a world where nobody ever forgot anything? Because that's what we're living in now with the internet.
When I read "right to be forgotten" I think of it just as how people forget about the dumb stuff they did as a kid, which we've all done and would prefer to forget. The internet makes this impossible.
Now obviously this could be misused to forget things that really shouldn't be forgot (say, murder or other political things), but that depends on the particular case and they need to be evaluated as such. Just because people have the option doesn't mean it will be abused, and maybe we should concentrate our efforts on making sure it isn't than denying the right completely.
[opinion]
Also please don't judge me too harshly but in my personal opinion I think a lot of people would have been for this a few years ago, but now when it's an option people always find reasons to bitch about something because it makes them seem smarter. "Hah, everyone thinks this is good? Let me prove everyone just how wrong they are." Not pointing at anyone in particular. It's not even tied to this particular issue either, but I feel like I see it a lot. I myself have done this in the past.
The data about you should belong to the person or thing collecting the data unless otherwise specified in an agreement of some sort (say, for instance, self-nominated data shall be owned by the user that input the data)
For example: you walk down the street and I see you (because you were there and you exist) and my memory of you being there might be recounted in a blog at some point. That blog might get indexed on Google.
Who owns that data about you? I would argue the person that made the observation owns it - the fact that you acted to walk down a street does not mean you get to control my recollection of that event, or the fact that it happened.
Your personal data belongs to you, yes. Your past actions do not. If you killed an old lady while DUI, sorry, that information does not belong to you, and you have no right to have it forgotten. Ahem... You should have no right. EU seems to think it is acceptable to rewrite history. As an European, I'm positively ashamed of the image we are sending the world on this matter.
Let the slippery slope begin. Islamic States will mandate that all information about women behaving against the Islamic customs be censored, worldwide. It's idiotic, but not more idiotic than the right to be forgotten.
Except a lot of the time recorded history is one-sided and often out of context. People should have a right to a reasonable amount of privacy. Especially children when they do not really understand the mistakes they make while growing up (adults too). Too many witch hunts come out of half-truths and manipulated 'evidence' and facts.
If you see this as expanding libel laws, including the ability to compel publishers to take down or retract libelous statements, then maybe there is some machinery in place. There is an objective criterion, at least - someone was under 18, someone definitely lied, etc.
But like any machinery it can be abused. And expanding it will increase the potential for abuse.
Except a lot of the time recorded history is quite accurate and in context, and people are using privacy or allegations of falsehood as an excuse to engage in censorship.
That's not to imply that all of the info out there is truthful and of legitimate public interest. But the right to be forgotten can and has in fact been abused.
I agree, and definitely do not think its a perfect solution. But I feel that people who are innocent deserve this ability, sort of akin to the statement: " it's better that 1000 guilty men go free than one innocent man be imprisoned"
Here's an alternative: When you turn 18, you get an automatic free name change. I'm sure it'll be a pain in the ass for the person in question, but it's easier than making the Internet forget something.
Besides, if an annoying bureaucratic process is sufficient to deter you from going ahead with a name change, then the privacy interest at stake here can't be that huge.
You're trying to oversolve the problem. Most of the legitimate right to be forgotten requests concern things like "I don't want my status as rape survivor to come up when an employer Googles me". If someone wants to doc they're doing to dox, regardless of any right to be forgotten. But a name change is good enough for 90% of folks.
Absolutely, I can't agree more. I'm not sure why you think it should be limited to people before the age of 18 though or why you think it should be limited to online presence though.
I can think of many corrupt politicians and criminals who would desperately love to be forgotten not to mention people with criminal histories that would love to become politicians. I mean even your average celebrity like Bill Cosby would love to erase bits of his history from the record right about now.