Can you include dates to all these events so we readers can put them into context?

It’s not a right; it’s a privilege. (If some people would just stop being stupid assholes, then we’d all be happy to forget about them.)

(And, of course:
RTBF -> GDPR -> copyright wrongness == the EU is down the rabbit hole, unlikely to ever return to the sunlight and fresh air [where the brain can better function])

Did I just tweet this article under #ThomasGoolnik ? Yes, I did…

I googled "Thomas Goolnik" from both US and Czechia. While the European page doesn’t show the previously re-indexed articles, this one is #1 in both searches.

lets remember this one:

Times Articles Removed From Google Results in Europe

By NOAM COHEN and MARK SCOTTOCT. 3, 2014

Google has notified The New York Times in the last month that links to five articles have been removed from some search results on European versions of its search engine to comply with Europe’s “right to be forgotten.”

The notifications offer vivid examples of the issues involved in Europe’s decision to allow individuals some measure of control over what appears online about themselves.

Of the five articles that Google informed The Times about, three are intensely personal — two wedding announcements from years ago and a brief paid death notice from 2001. Presumably, the people involved had privacy reasons for asking for the material to be hidden.

The other two Times articles are less about personal details than about reputation. And it is this concern — even if the facts are fairly reported — that represents a big difference between the way Europe and the United States regulate, or do not regulate, how information is presented online.

Unlike in the United States, where freedom of expression is a fundamental right that supersedes other interests, Europe views an individual’s privacy and freedom of expression as almost equal rights.

As a matter of policy, Google does not reveal who asked for the material to be shielded, or even what search terms will cause the articles to disappear from results.

A little online research — with the help of search engines — showed that each article had a person with a connection to Europe. Google and privacy lawyers are at loggerheads over whether anyone in the world can ask that material be hidden from European search engines, or only people in Europe.

One Times article that is being shielded from certain searches in Europe is a report from 2002 about a decision by a United States court to close three websites that the federal government accused of selling an estimated $1 million worth of unusable Web addresses. The complaint named three British companies, TLD Network, Quantum Management and TBS Industries, as well as two men who it said controlled the companies: Thomas Goolnik and Edward Harris Goolnik of London.

The case was later settled. Thomas Goolnik did not respond to messages left via social networking sites.

Since May, when the European high court made its initial decision on the right to be forgotten, Google has received roughly 140,000 privacy requests connected to more than 500,000 links, according to the company’s top lawyer. So far, the search giant has approved around half of the requests.

The bulk do not involve news websites. This summer, Google told several European media outlets, including the BBC and The Guardian, that links to some of their online articles had been removed from its European search results. Yet in a bizarre twist, the company later reinstated some of the links to The Guardian’s articles after that paper challenged Google’s decision.

In the last of The Times articles, a feature about a 1998 production of “Villa Villa” by the ensemble called De la Guarda, it was much harder to divine the objection. Not a review, the article explored how the antic, acrobatic show was managing “to get a generation raised on MTV interested in seeing live theater.”