|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 31 2012 @ 06:35 PM EDT |
Google has not the right to decide what information is false--any conceivable
notion of equity (as opposed to raw use of power to suppress dissent) HAS to
start with that fundamental bedrock principle.
Any concept of free speech has to start from the same place.
So if I, or a federal bureaucrat, or a third-world religio-tribal-fascist
dictator, or an angel from heaven, tells Google to remove something because it's
false--Google must refuse. All of us are, from the standpoint of free speech and
truth, equal before Law.
Now, if I have gone to court, and convinced a jury of my peers that a statement
is libel, then ... I have something to present to Google that is actionable.
Before then, before the court has ruled, I am just as likely (from Google's
perspective) to be slandering when I accuse someone else of libel, as the other
person was.
This ruling would be disastrous for the free interchange of ideas. What happens
if I "inform" the local university library that I regard the Bible, or
Darwin's Babble, or Huckleberry Finn as a personal affront to me, or Mohammad,
or the Touring Tooth Fairy. Does the University suddenly have a responsibility
to study any of the above?
Can we afford a society in which any government thinks the answer should be
"yes"?
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|