Laws for such things vary wildly between countries.
:tup: of course Ryan, I guess its too much of a generalised question really, the idea of being cached on google without your consent and so freely is quite daunting to say the least especially if it’s perfectly within that “publishers” right to do so :confused2
My name is seemingly unique in the world from my searches. (Less than 50 in the world with the same surname even)… so it is all about “me”.
I have found some odd entries where people have a habit of posting ancient information from the pre-internet age of my childhood onto the internet! Some of these are a little disturbing in implications for the future…
One example is from a old paper-based newsletter with a small distribution circle, from a small local community where I used to live some 20 years ago. They have recently started pulling extracts from its archives (a “this month 10, 20, 30 & 40 years ago” type thing). Of course as well as having the same small local readership, the current newsletter is also posted online. So recently, my name appeared in a flashback to 20 years ago, and the info appears in Google now and therefore no doubt cached forever. Nothing worrying in it per se, but the uploading of older data by others, is something you have no control over and is an interesting trend to keep an eye on! What you might have said 20 years ago to a closed distribution paper newsletter and what you might post on the internet might be two different things… yet they are merging without my permission.
A few months back, I was pondering the scary scenario that in the future, some oppressive regime came to power and did a holocaust type round up based upon a Google searches… on political, religious, ethnic, or other discriminatory grounds.
Data mining and aggregation is only going to get more sophisticated and more discerning in the future.
If caching by google (and others) makes it virtually impossible to remove anything once it has been posted (even if only briefly before being deleted), then maybe we should be more concerned than we are about what gets online in the first place and how that information might be used against us?
There is certainly food for thought, and we’d be wise to consider the future implications before it is too late.
Having said all that, I am remarkably laid back about it all… I just have occasional lightbulb moments, that makes me go back and rethink my attitude, double check my Facebook privacy settings, and go and do a google checkup on my name etc.
We don’t need to live in fear or paranoia (just yet!), but I think being guarded in a what we say and do is wise.
Mike
Yeah Mike I agree for sure :tup: You can never be too tuned into what you do online, even if you do think ur being overly paranoid isn’t it better to be safe than sorry at the end of the day?
That whole issue about having stuff posted without your permission is a bit of a niggling issue for me, I wouldn’t like that to happen to me regardless of the impact even if it was something trivial, its the principle of the matter/act that would bother me - if i wanted it out there I would do so, not have it enforced…but as what was mentioned before it varies depending on your location - whether this is in terms of the victim or the publisher I’m still not entirely sure :scratch:
I think the biggest concern is the “caching” aspect…
Once something is cached, you can never be fully sure you’ve erased all the traces.
So say the political climate changed seriously in a negative manner sometime in our lifetime, and we all changed our minds about what we wanted published… it is too late to be making that decision then. Multiple copies will exist such that it will be very hard to ensure something is really “gone” when deleted.
So you can tackle the person who posted something, and hopefully get them to take it down, but you can’t remove it from the public domain fully since Google & Waybackmachine (and who knows what government agencies and others!) etc will all have cached copies of it.
I’m sure there will probably be no reason to worry, now or in the future, but using common sense is just wise.
Mike
I’ve not done too badly from my mistakes in the past, and I’m sure it’s always been down to my blatant lack of caring for privacy… no-ones perfect and how I see it, if I’m open about myself all the time, it ensures there’s no skeletons in my closet and it allows people to avoid making assumptions based on circumstance. 
Wrong answer, just because it’s not blatantly visible on Google doesn’t mean you can’t find things out about them… you can take my word for it that there are people in the world who could quite easily find out anything about anyone using just the Internet… whether it’s legal or not is another thing but your information is never safe. The only way to cover your tracks online is to not browse the web at all (a security expert told me this).
Eastern nations tend to have more of a problem with this, but in most countries it’s generally accepted that you can take photos of anyone you like, however you can’t publish, sell or license them for financial gain without their written or verbal permission, if they pertain to illegal activities (as in you’re showing off your criminal prowess), put someone’s life or property in danger as a result (this includes military bases), or if it’s of children or vulnerable adults (without their guardian or advocates express written consent). Oh and if they ask you to remove the picture when you take it, you’re obligated to remove it (unless your taking it as proof of a crime or something like that) - or ensure their identity is indistinguishable (facial / potentially distinguishable character blurring)… it’s all pretty complex!
The location and nature of the photo is very important in most countries too. Taking a photo of someone naked on a beach and posting it online may be okay, but taking a photo of them through their window at their home is usually not.
Usually not? When can you justifiably take a photo through someone’s window of them (possibly naked) 
When can you justifiably take a photo through someone’s window of them (possibly naked)
When you’re somewhere where there are no laws against it.
When I worked for the postal service, the girls were passing around a PlayGirl (yes, the mail gets read) because some movie star was naked in his own (holiday?) house and photographers got photos of him through windows and on the balcony. I do know they got published, because I saw them, and no, I don’t know if he sued or whatever, but who cares, by then it’s too late and there are a bazillion copies everywhere.
In the UK the laws of copyright apply. As long as the photo was taken IN a public place, and OF a public place (e.g. standing on a pavement is IN a public place, but photographing someone through their window in not OF a public place 
)then the photographer retains the copyright of the picture and can do with it as he/she pleases (provided such use does not contravene another piece of legislation, such as defamation or libel).
Not being allowed to take photos of children or vulnerable adults is also a misconception - as is their right to get you to delete it. Even the police have this misconception. Whilst most people would happily delete such photos on request, they are under no legal obligation to do so - this is common question in newspapers (e.g. to their Consumer Justice sections) and the answer has always been as I describe above.
Of course this is just the UK - it almost certainly differs elsewhere.
Edit: The text below is extracted from a site I created for a client (the site is now defunct). This maybe helps put clearer words around what I say above.
Photographic Copyright, a Guide
It is very important for both the photographer and client to understand the legal position on how and when images that have been taken can be used after the commission.
When you commission a professional photographer to take some pictures you are entering a legally binding contract, with rights and responsibilities applicable to both parties. One important aspect of this contract concerns copyright of the images made. It is perceived by many clients that all rights to the image or images stay with them. This is in fact not the case, and hasn’t been for many years. The law on copyright changed fundamentally with the passing of the Copyright, Designs & Patent Act 1988. Prior to this Act the person or company who commissioned the photography owned the copyright to the work.
The position was reversed with the introduction of the 1988 Act as it granted photographers the same rights as musicians, painters and other creative individuals. The copyright of the photograph now belongs to the person who took it. There is an exception when a photographer is employed by their company and in this case the company owns the rights to the photographs. It is possible for the company to waive this right if it has been negotiated into the contract of employment.
The copyright lasts for 70 years after the end of the year in which the author dies. It offers protection against unauthorised reproduction of the photographs and entitles the owner to economic benefit from it. The act also extends some moral rights to the photographer which include the right not to have it falsely attributed, and the right not to have the work subjected to derogatory treatment.
In reality this means that clients may only use any photographs taken by the professional photographer as per the terms agreed at the time they were commissioned. Any modification to these terms must be sought and agreed from the photographer and additional fees agreed as appropriate.
For this reason it is essential that clients specify (preferably in writing) the uses to which images will be used when briefing the photographer and requesting a quotation. This agreement then forms part of the contract. It should cover how the work will be used, where (geographically) it will be used and for how long it will be used.
Ultimately, it is in the interests of everyone to have a clear understanding of what has been agreed, so that there is no confusion if any subsequent issue arises.
^ It’s australia who’s getting weird about photos of kids in public. People are so terrified of pedo’s having pics of kids, anyone with a camera seen anywhere where there might happen to be a kid might get their face and camera smashed in.
I should stop reading the news : (
When you are a in country which doesn’t have privacy laws or if you have permission.
siteguru, I should have worded my comments better. When I stated “it’s generally accepted” I was denoting that as a best practice rather than a legal requirement (I know people who despite the laws have been hassled by the authorities on taking pictures their legally entitled too - hence why I didn’t specifically quote them).
Well, I am not the only “molona” on the net and that’s reflected on the results… furthermore if you think that molona is also an adjective, and not only a name.
Regarding my real name, the first result is my twitter account which I rarely use
Well if you google Andrew Cooper you get a variety of University lecturers and mainly a male model!..That would of course be myself! Hahaha I kid! I don’t come up until the 9th page! 
Yet if you google Andrew Cooper Web Design I come up on the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd pages in Google. If you Google Andrew Cooper SitePoint then yea, I’m plastered all over the place! I’m happy with that because the results will change after a while from when my Website has been properly launched! But I don’t think it affects my employment chances and I don’t have anything personal posted online except for some old pictures on a forum which I can’t seem to find through Google and it was through a name that is unidentifiable with me. My Facebook account is private so my photos and information are protected too.
I’m not all that bothered about my Google rank for my name, I’m more bothered about my Google ranking for my business Website and my clients Websites. It would be nice to come up on the first page for Andrew Cooper, maybe one day it will be so! We’ll see! I’ve Googled myself quite a few times in the past, I don’t think I’ve done it in over a year though now.
I was considering having my PDF available publicly but then I decided against it for some of the reasons you listed just there. Whoever requires my CV can have it, but the whole world don’t need it. It has a lot of personal / private information on it. At the same time, I do like looking at other peoples’ CV’s and Resumé’s because it gives me ideas on what I should and shouldn’t include and also inspiration for the layout and design
Not very, it seems.
I didn’t think about this actually! I guess it didn’t cross my mind because I didn’t think people would be such evil b-stards to do such a thing, especially if the person hasn’t done anything to offend or insult. Hopefully such a thing wouldn’t happen to me!
Also, Google have just released Google Profiles where you can, according to Google, control how you appear in Google and people will see it on their results page when they do web searches for your name. Something to add to the pot there! Anyone created one or thinking of creating one?
Andrew Cooper
I am very “Google-able” and that is it just the way I like it. I do not hide my domain ownership details either. I have around 200. I am suspicious of people that do. If you have something to hide, then you should not be on the net. Of course there is always exceptions but for me having exposure is key for success.
I have around 200.
You have 200 domains, only one word comes to mind, why?
I am suspicious of people that do. If you have something to hide, then you should not be on the net.
You’re saying everyone should reveal everything personal about them-self. The past month that I’ve been reading the news, the Internet is not swarming with friendly, happy, kind people that I can feel confident and allow anyone to see my personal information, anyone anywhere in the world. If this was the case people wouldn’t care about camouflaging there email address against SPAM and Malware.
You can adjust your spam filters to block unwanted email. 200 domains because I develop some and resell others. 200 is nothing. Others have thousands. I have about 50 developed and make them pay for themselves with Ad Sense. Others are for different business ventures. There is few secrets on the internet. With ip tracking and other software your information can be found pretty easily nowadays. Each to their own. I prefer not to hide behind a screen or try to mask my identity.
beside some confidential information (Eg. Bank A/C), i don mind to be googleable…
<snip>no fake singatures please… be patient ;)</snip>