text:
The right to be forgotten (RTBF) is the right to have private information about a person be removed from Internet searches and other directories under some circumstances. The concept has been discussed and put into practice in several jurisdictions, including Argentina, the European Union (EU), and the Philippines. The issue has arisen from desires of individuals to "determine the development of their life in an autonomous way, without being perpetually or periodically stigmatized as a consequence of a specific action performed in the past."

There has been controversy about the practicality of establishing a right to be forgotten (in respect to access of information) as an international human right. This is partly due to the vagueness of current rulings attempting to implement such a right. Furthermore, there are concerns about its impact on the right to freedom of expression, its interaction with the right to privacy, and whether creating a right to be forgotten would decrease the quality of the Internet through censorship and the rewriting of history. Those in favor of the right to be forgotten cite its necessity due to issues such as revenge porn sites appearing in search engine listings for a person's name, as well as instances of these results referencing petty crimes individuals may have committed in the past. The central concern lies in the potentially undue influence that such results may exert upon a person's online reputation almost indefinitely if not removed.

The right to be forgotten "reflects the claim of an individual to have certain data deleted so that third persons can no longer trace them." It has been defined as "the right to silence on past events in life that are no longer occurring." The right to be forgotten leads to allowing individuals to have information, videos, or photographs about themselves deleted from certain Internet records so that they cannot be found by search engines.
, there are few protections against the harm that incidents such as revenge porn sharing, or pictures uploaded due to poor judgement.

The right to be forgotten is distinct from the right to privacy. The right to privacy constitutes information that is not publicly known, whereas the right to be forgotten involves removing information that was publicly known at a certain time and not allowing third parties to access the information.

Limitations of application in a jurisdiction include the inability to require removal of information held by companies outside the jurisdiction. There is no global framework to allow individuals control over their online image. However, Professor Viktor Mayer-Schönberger, an expert from Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford, said that Google cannot escape compliance with the law of France implementing the decision of the European Court of Justice in 2014 on the right to be forgotten. Mayer-Schönberger said nations, including the US, had long maintained that their local laws have "extra-territorial effects".

Recognition by jurisdiction

Argentina
Argentina has seen lawsuits by celebrities against Google and Yahoo! in which the plaintiffs demand the removal of certain search results, and require removal of links to photographs. One case, brought by artist Virginia da Cunha, involved photographs which had originally been taken with her permission and uploaded with her permission, however she alleged that the search results improperly associated her photographs with pornography. De Cunha's case achieved initial success resulting in Argentina search engines not showing images of the particular celebrity, however, this decision is on appeal.

Virginia Simari, the judge in favor of De Cunha, stated that people have the right to control their image and avert others from "capturing, reproducing, broadcasting, or publishing one's image without permission." In addition, Simari used a treatise written by Julio César Rivera, a Buenos Aires lawyer, author, and law professor "the right to control one's personal data includes the right to prevent others from using one's image." Since the 1990s Argentina has also been a part of the habeas data movement in which they "adopted a constitutional provision that is part freedom-of-government-information law and part data privacy law." Their version is known as Amparo. Article 43 explains it:

"Any person shall file this action to obtain information on the data about himself and their purpose, registered in public records or databases, or in private ones intended to supply information; and in case of false data or discrimination, this action may be filed to request the suppression, rectification, confidentiality or updating of said data."

Argentina's efforts to protect their people's right to be forgotten has been called "the most complete" because individuals are able to correct, delete, or update information about themselves. Overall, their information is bound to remain confidential.

China
In May 2016, Chinese courts in Beijing determined citizens do not have the right to be forgotten when a judge ruled in favor of Baidu in a lawsuit over removing search results. It was the first of such cases to be heard in Chinese court. In the suit, Ren Jiayu sued Chinese search engine Baidu over search results that associated him with a previous employer, Wuxi Taoshi Biotechnology. Ren argued that by posting the search results, Baidu had infringed upon his right of name and right of reputation, both protected under Chinese law. Because of these protections, Ren believed he had a right to be forgotten by removing these search results. The court ruled against Ren, claiming his name is a collection of common characters and as a result the search results were derived from relevant words.

Nowhere in China's civil code are the concepts of privacy or the right to be forgotten discussed. There is no data protection authority, nor a specific state agency in place to monitor the protection of citizens' personal data. In China today, data protection regulation is aimed at consumers, on an individual level, in contrast to the EU's right to privacy, in which the individual is considered a "data subject", with the right to be protected. Chinese legislative progress towards supporting the right to be forgotten is slow. The topic has been debated for more than 10 years now, and continues to be a challenge. Small provisions have been implemented related to personal data processing, but do not amount to a comprehensive data protection regime. The European Union Directorate-General for Internal Policies has issued policy recommendations on a realistic, rather than a legalistic basis for data protection as to the transfer of data between the EU and China vis-a-vis the latter's lack of compatible regulation in this area.

European Union

Europe's data protection laws do not implement a "right to be forgotten", but a more limited "right to [data] erasure". Variations on the concept a right to be forgotten have existed in Europe for many years, including:

 In the United Kingdom, such as under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act of 1974 there is the idea that after a certain period of time many criminal convictions are "spent", meaning that information regarding said person should not be considered when obtaining insurance or seeking employment.
 In France  (the right to be forgotten) was enacted in French Law in 2010.

Views on the right to be forgotten differ greatly between the United States and EU countries. In the United States, transparency, the right of free speech according to the First Amendment, and the "right to know" are typically favored over removing or increasing difficulty to access truthfully published information regarding individuals and corporations. Although the term "right to be forgotten" is a relatively new idea,  the European Court of Justice legally solidified that the "right to be forgotten" is a human right when they ruled against Google in the Costeja case on May 13, 2014.

In 1995, the European Union adopted the European Data Protection Directive (Directive 95/46/EC) to regulate the processing of personal data. This is now considered a component of human rights law. The new European General Data Protection Regulation provides protection and exemption for companies listed as "media" companies, like newspapers and other journalistic work. However, Google purposely opted out of being classified as a "media" company, therefore the company is not protected. Judges in the European Union ruled that because the international corporation, Google, is a collector and processor of data it should be classified as a "data controller" under the meaning of the EU data protection directive. These "data controllers" are required under EU law to remove data that is "inadequate, irrelevant, or no longer relevant", making this directive of global importance.

In Article 12 of the Directive 95/46/EC the EU gave a legal basis to Internet protection for individuals. In 2012 the European Commission disclosed a draft European Data Protection Regulation to supersede the directive, which included specific protection in the right to be forgotten in Article 17. A right to be forgotten was replaced by a more limited right of erasure in Article 17 of the version of the GDPR that was adopted by the European Parliament in March 2014 and which became EU law in April 2016.

To exercise the right to be forgotten and request removal from a search engine, one must complete a form through the search engine's website. Google's removal request process requires the applicant to identify their country of residence, personal information, a list of the URLs to be removed along with a short description, and - in some cases - attachment of legal identification. The applicant receives an email from Google confirming the request but the request must be assessed before it is approved for removal. If the request is approved, searches using the individual's name will no longer result in the content appearing in search results. The content remains online and is not erased. After a request is filled, their removals team reviews the request, weighing "the individual's right to privacy against the public's right to know", deciding if the website is "inadequate, irrelevant or no longer relevant, or excessive in relation to the purposes for which they were processed". Google has formed an Advisory Council of various professors, lawyers, and government officials from around Europe to provide guidelines for these decisions. However, the review process is still a mystery to the general public. Guidelines set by EU regulators were not released until November 2014, but Google began to take action on this much sooner than that, which (according to one author) allowed them "to shape interpretation to [their] own ends". In May 2015, eighty academics called for more transparency from Google in an open letter.

The form asks people to select one of the 28 countries that make up the European Union, as well as Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, and Switzerland. "The form allows an individual or someone representing an individual to put in a request" for the removal of any URLs believed to be a violation of the individual's privacy. Regardless of who is submitting the form, some form of photo identification of the person the form is being submitted for must be present. This is meant to serve as proof that the person for whom the request was made for does in fact approve.

If Google refuses a request to delink material, Europeans can appeal to their local data protection agency. As of May 2015, the British Data Protection Agency had treated 184 such complaints, and overturned Google's decision in about a quarter of those. If Google fails to comply with a Data Protection Agency decision, it can face legal action.

In July 2014, in the early stages of Google's effort to comply with the court ruling, legal experts questioned whether Google's widely publicized delistings of a number of news articles violated the UK and EU Data Protection Directive, since in implementing the Directive, Google is required to weigh the damage to the person making the request against any public interest in the information being available. Google indeed acknowledged that some of its search result removals, affecting articles that were of public interest, were incorrect, and reinstated the links a week later. Commentators like Charles Arthur, technology editor of The Guardian, and Andrew Orlowski of The Register noted that Google is not required to comply with removal requests at all, as it can refer requests to the information commissioner in the relevant country for a decision weighing the respective merits of public interest and individual rights.

Google notifies websites that have URLs delinked, and various news organizations, such as BBC, have published lists of delinked articles. Complainants have been named in news commentary regarding those delinkings. In August 2015 the British Data Protection Agency issued an enforcement action requiring Google to delink some of these more recent articles from searches for a complainant's name, after Google refused to do so. Google complied with the request. Some academics have criticized news organizations and Google for their behavior.

In July 2015, Google accidentally revealed data on delinkings that "shows 95% of Google privacy requests are from citizens out to protect personal and private information – not criminals, politicians and public figures."

This data leak caused serious social consequences for Google as the public expressed their outrage and fear over the information that was recently made public. Though only 5% of requests were made by criminals, politicians, and public figures, the content removed was what sparked the most fear. In particular, one request for data removal was from a British doctor requesting to have 50 links removed on past botched medical procedures. Google agreed to remove three search results containing his personal information. The public voiced their outrage stating that removing such information can be used for manipulation and could lead to innocent people making uninformed decisions. Google responded to the public outrage by saying that when removing content they consider both the right of the individual and public interest.

The European Union has been pushing for the delinkings requested by EU citizens to be implemented by Google not just in European versions of Google (as in google.co.uk, google.fr, etc.), but on google.com and other international subdomains. Regulators want delinkings to be implemented so that the law cannot be circumvented in any way. Google has refused the French Data Protection Agency's demand to apply the right internationally. Due in part to their refusal to comply with the recommendation of the privacy regulating board Google has become the subject of a four-year-long antitrust investigation by the European Commission. In September 2015, the French Data Protection Agency dismissed Google's appeal.

The French Data Protection Agency appealed to the EU courts to seek action on Google for failing to delink across its global servers. In September 2019 the Court of Justice for the EU issued its decision, finding that Google is not required to delink on sites external to the EU, concluding that "Currently, there is no obligation under EU law, for a search engine operator who grants a request for de-referencing made by a data subject ... to carry out such a de-referencing on all the versions of its search engine."

As of September 2015, the most delinked site is www.facebook.com. Three of Google's own sites, groups.google.com, plus.google.com and www.youtube.com are among the ten most delinked sites. In addition to Google, Yahoo and Bing have also put up forms for making delinking requests.

In September 2019, the European Court of Justice ruled that the Right to be Forgotten did not apply outside of its member states. The ruling meant that Google did not have to delete the names of individuals from all of its international versions.

In December 2022, the judges in Luxembourg further extended the Right to be Forgotten in the case C-460/20 TU, RE vs Google LLC. The case relates to two managers of a group of investment companies, who argued that three unflattering news articles should be 'de-referenced' from the search engine results of Google, when searching for their names. They claimed that the information presented in the articles was factually wrong, which raised the question whether search engine operators need to check the accuracy of the information. Additionally, the applicants required that photographs showing them on preview images — or thumbnails — when carrying out a search, ought to be removed. In this judgment the European Court of Justice largely agreed with the request of the applicants. Search engine operators such as Google are required to de-reference the respective information, if a person who seeks de-referencing submits 'relevant and sufficient' evidence capable of substantiating his or her request, and thereby manifests the inaccuracy of the information found (para. 72). For thumbnails an independent assessment must be carried out, but essentially the same thinking applies.

Caselaw in Spain
In May 2014, the European Court of Justice ruled against Google in Costeja, a case brought by a Spanish man, Mario Costeja González, who requested the removal of a link to a digitized 1998 article in La Vanguardia newspaper about an auction for his foreclosed home, for a debt that he had subsequently paid. He initially attempted to have the article removed by complaining to the Spanish Agency of data protection, which rejected the claim on the grounds that it was lawful and accurate, but accepted a complaint against Google and asked Google to remove the results. Google sued in the Spanish Audiencia Nacional (National High Court) which referred a series of questions to the European Court of Justice. The court ruled in Costeja that search engines are responsible for the content they point to and thus, Google was required to comply with EU data privacy laws. On its first day of compliance only (May 30, 2014), Google received 12,000 requests to have personal details removed from its search engine.

Caselaw in Germany
On October 27, 2009, lawyers for Wolfgang Werlé who—together with Manfred Lauber—was convicted of murdering Walter Sedlmayr sent the Wikimedia Foundation a cease and desist letter requesting that Werlé's name be removed from the English language Wikipedia article Walter Sedlmayr, citing a 1973 Federal Constitutional Court decision that allows the suppression of a criminal's name in news accounts once he is released from custody. Previously, Alexander H. Stopp, attorney for Werlé and Lauber, had won a default judgment in German court, on behalf of Lauber, against the Wikimedia Foundation. According to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Werlé's lawyers also challenged an Internet service provider in Austria which published the names of the convicted killers.

Wikimedia is based in the United States, where the First Amendment protects freedom of speech and freedom of the press. In Germany, the law seeks to protect the name and likenesses of private persons from unwanted publicity. On January 18, 2008, a court in Hamburg supported the personality rights of Werlé, which under German law includes removing his name from archive coverage of the case.

On November 12, 2009, The New York Times reported that Wolfgang Werlé had a case pending against the Wikimedia Foundation in a German court. The editors of the German-language Wikipedia article about Sedlmayr removed the names of the murderers, which have since then been restored to the article. The Guardian observed that the lawsuit has led to the Streisand effect, an upsurge in publicity for the case resulting from the legal action.

On December 15, 2009, the German Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof) in Karlsruhe ruled that German websites do not have to check their archives in order to provide permanent protection of personality rights for convicted criminals. The case occurred after the names of the brothers were found on the website of Deutschlandradio, in an archive article dating from July 2000. The presiding judge Gregor Galke stated "This is not a blank check", and pointed out that the right to rehabilitation of offenders had been taken into consideration.

On November 28, 2019, the German constitutional court in Karlsruhe ruled that German murderer Paul Termann has the right to be forgotten.

General Data Protection Regulation

The 2012 draft European Data Protection Regulation Article 17 detailed the "right to be forgotten and to erasure". Under Article 17 individuals to whom the data appertains are granted the right to "obtain from the controller the erasure of personal data relating to them and the abstention from further dissemination of such data, especially in relation to personal data which are made available by the data subject while he or she was a child or where the data is no longer necessary for the purpose it was collected for, the subject withdraws consent, the storage period has expired, the data subject objects to the processing of personal data or the processing of data does not comply with other regulation".

The EU defines "data controllers" as "people or bodies that collect and manage personal data". The EU General Data Protection Regulation requires data controllers who have been informed that an individual has requested the deletion of any links to or copies of information must "take all reasonable steps, including technical measures, in relation to data for the publication of which the controller is responsible, to inform third parties which are processing such data, that a data subject requests them to erase any links to, or copy or replication of that personal data. Where the controller has authorized a third party publication of personal data, the controller shall be considered responsible for that publication". In the situation that a data controller does not take all reasonable steps then they will be fined heavily.

The European Parliament was once "expected to adopt the proposals in first reading in the April 2013 Plenary session". The right to be forgotten was replaced by a more limited right to erasure in the version of the GDPR adopted by the European Parliament in March 2014. Article 17 provides that the data subject has the right to request erasure of personal data related to him on any one of a number of grounds including non-compliance with article 6.1 (lawfulness) that includes a case (f) where the legitimate interests of the controller is overridden by the interests or fundamental rights and freedoms of the data subject which require protection of personal data (see also Costeja).

The European Union is a highly influential group of states, and this movement towards the right to be forgotten in the EU is a step towards its global recognition as a right. To support this, in 2012 the Obama Administration released a "Privacy Bill of Rights" to protect consumers online, and while this is not quite the strength of the EU law, it is a step towards recognition of the right to be forgotten.

India

In April 2016, the Delhi High Court began to examine the issue after a Delhi banker requested to have his personal details removed from search results following a marital dispute. In this case, due to the dispute being settled, the banker's request is valid. The High Court has asked for a reply from Google and other search engine companies by September 19, upon which the court will continue to investigate the issue.

In January 2017 the Karnataka High Court upheld the right to be forgotten, in a case involving a woman who originally went to court in order to get a marriage certificate annulled, claiming to have never been married to the man on the certificate. After the two parties came to an agreement, the woman's father wanted her name to be removed from search engines regarding criminal cases in the high court. The Karnataka High Court approved the father's request, stating that she had a right to be forgotten. According to the court, its ruling would align with western countries' decisions, which typically approve of the right to be forgotten when dealing with cases "involving women in general and highly sensitive cases involving rape or affecting the modesty and reputation of the person concerned." The woman in this specific case was worried that the search results would affect her standing with her husband, as well as her reputation in society.

As of February 2017, the Delhi High Court is hearing a case involving a man requesting to have information regarding his mother and wife to be removed from a search engine. The man believes that having his name linked to the search is hindering his employment options. The Delhi High Court is still working on the case, along with the issue of whether or not a right to be forgotten should be a legal standard in India. Currently, there is no legal standard for the right to be forgotten, but if implemented, this would mean that citizens no longer need to file a case in order to request for information from search engines to be removed. This case could have significant impacts on the right to be forgotten and search engines in India.

South Korea
In May 2016, South Korea's Communications Commission (KCC) announced citizens will be able to request search engines and website administrators to restrict their own postings from being publicly accessible. The KCC released "Guidelines on the Right to Request Access Restrictions on Personal Internet Postings", which took effect in June 2016 and do not apply to third party contents. To the extent that the right to be forgotten concerns a data subject's right to limit the searchability of third party postings about him/her, the Guideline does not constitute a right to be forgotten. Also, as to the right to withdraw one's own posting, critics have noted that people have been able to delete their own postings before the Guideline as long as they have retained their login credentials, and that people who have misplaced their login credentials were permitted to retrieve or receive new ones. The only services significantly affected by the Guideline are Wiki-type services where people's contributions make logical sense only in response to or in conjunction with one another's contributions and therefore the postings are made permanent part of the mass-created content, but KCC made sure that the Guideline applies to these services only when the posting identifies the authors.

The guidelines created by the KCC include that data subjects can remove content that includes the URL links, and any evidence consisting of personal information. The commission included different amendments to the guideline. This includes describing the Guidelines as a "minimum" and "preliminary" precaution regarding privacy rights in vague areas of existing laws. The guideline encompasses foreign Internet companies that provide translation services for South Korean consumers. In order to have a person's information "forgotten" he or she has to go through a three step process: the issue posted with the URL, proof of ownership of the post, grounds for the request. There are restrictions on each step. When posting the URL, the web operator has the right to preserve the posting issue. The second being that if the post is relevant to public interest, web operators will process this request on the terms of relevance.

United States

In law
Consideration of the right to be forgotten can be seen in US case law, specifically in Melvin v. Reid, and in Sidis v. FR Publishing Corp.

In Melvin v. Reid (1931), an ex-prostitute was charged with murder and then acquitted; she subsequently tried to assume a quiet and anonymous place in society. However, the 1925 film The Red Kimono revealed her history, and she successfully sued the producer. The court reasoned that "any person living a life of rectitude has that right to happiness which includes a freedom from unnecessary attacks on his character, social standing or reputation."

In Sidis v. FR Publishing Corp. (1940), the plaintiff, William James Sidis, was a former child prodigy who wished to spend his adult life quietly, without recognition; however, this was disrupted by an article in The New Yorker. The court held here that there were limits to the right to control one's life and facts about oneself, and held that there is social value in published facts, and that a person cannot ignore their celebrity status merely because they want to.

There is opposition to further recognition of the right to be forgotten in the United States as commentators argue that it will contravene the right to freedom of speech and freedom of expression, or will constitute censorship, thus potentially breaching peoples' constitutionally protected right to freedom of expression in the United States Constitution. These criticisms are consistent with the proposal that the only information that can be removed by user's request is content that they themselves uploaded.

In a June 2014 opinion piece in Forbes, columnist Joseph Steinberg noted that "many privacy protections that Americans believe that they enjoy – even some guaranteed by law – have, in fact, been eroded or even obliterated by technological advances." Steinberg, in explaining the need for legislation guaranteeing the "right to be forgotten", noted that existing laws require adverse information  be removed from credit reports after a period of time, and that allowing the sealing or expunging of criminals records are effectively undermined by the ability of prospective lenders or employers to forever find the removed information in a matter of seconds by doing a web search.

On March 11, 2015, Intelligence Squared US, an organization that stages Oxford-Style debates, held an event centered on the question, "Should the U.S. adopt the 'Right to be Forgotten' online?" The side against the motion won with a 56% majority of the voting audience.

While opinions among experts are divided in the U.S., one survey indicated that 9 in 10 Americans want some form of the right to be forgotten. The consumer rights organization Consumer Watchdog has filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission for Americans to obtain the right as well.

In March 2017, New York state senator Tony Avella and assemblyman David Weprin introduced a bill proposing that individuals be allowed to require search engines and online speakers to remove information that is "inaccurate", "irrelevant", "inadequate", or "excessive", that is "no longer material to current public debate or discourse" and is causing demonstrable harm to the subject.

By private entities
In January 2021, the Boston Globe announced a program to allow subjects of relatively inconsequential stories to have the stories contextualized, removed from Google searches or anonymized.

Connection to international relations
The regulatory differences in the protection of personal data between countries has real impact on international relations. The right to be forgotten, specifically, is a matter of EU-US relations when applied to cross-border data flow, as it raises questions about territorial sovereignty. The structure of the Westphalian international system assumes that the reach of a country's jurisdiction is limited to its geographic territory. However, online interactions are independent of geographic location and present across multiple locations, rendering the traditional concept of territorial sovereignty moot. Therefore, the EU and the United States are forced to confront their regulatory differences and negotiate on a set of regulations that apply to all foreign companies processing and handling data of European citizens and residents.

The regulatory differences on the right to be forgotten along with numerous other data protection rights have shaped discussions and negotiations on trans-Atlantic data privacy regulations. A case in point is the EU and the United States' endeavors to develop the Safe Harbor agreement, a data transfer pact that enables the transfer of data between the EU and US companies in a manner consistent with the EU's data protection schemes. Article 25 of the Data Protection Directive articulates that cross-border transfer of data can take place only if the "third country in question ensures an adequate level of protection," meaning that the country meets the EU's minimum standards of data protection. The standards include, among many provisions, a component that protects the right to "opt out" of further processing or transmission of personal data, under the assumption that data may not be further processed in ways inconsistent with the intent for which they were collected.

Given the inconsistencies between the EU and the United States on numerous digital privacy regulations, including the right to be forgotten, Article 25 poses a threat to trans-Atlantic data flows. Therefore, the EU and the United States entered into negotiations to mediate the differences through the Safe Harbor agreement, which as a result of debate and discussion between the two parties, requires companies to provide individuals with the choice or opportunity to "opt out" and afford other protections.

Under the pressures of the mass surveillance carried out by the US government on European citizens' data, the Safe Harbor agreement has been invalidated by the European Union Court of Justice in its Schrems case. The Safe Harbor agreement has now been replaced by the Privacy Shield principles.

Response and criticism

Response by reputation management firms

Businesses that manage their clients' online reputations have responded to the European Court ruling by exercising the right to be forgotten as a means to remove unfavorable information. One technique used by reputation consulting firms is to submit multiple requests for each link, written with different angles in an attempt to get links removed. Google, for example, does not limit the number of requests that can be submitted on the removal of a given link.

Criticism

Major criticisms stem from the idea that the right to be forgotten would restrict the right to freedom of speech. Many nations, and the United States in particular (with the First Amendment to the United States Constitution), have very strong domestic freedom of speech laws, which would be challenging to reconcile with the right to be forgotten. Some academics see that only a limited form of the right to be forgotten would be reconcilable with US constitutional law; the right of an individual to delete data that he or she has personally submitted. In this limited form of the right individuals could not have material removed that has been uploaded by others, as demanding the removal of information could constitute censorship and a reduction in the freedom of expression in many countries. Sandra Coliver of the Open Society Justice Initiative argues that not all rights must be compatible and this conflict between the two rights is not detrimental to the survival of either.

The draft General Data Protection Regulation was written broadly and this has caused concern. It has attracted criticism that its enactment would require data controlling companies to go to great lengths to identify third parties with the information and remove it. The proposed regulation has also attracted criticism due to the fact that this could produce a censoring effect in that companies, such as Facebook or Google, will wish to not be fined under the act, and will therefore be likely to delete wholesale information rather than facing the fine, which could produce a "serious chilling effect." In addition to this, there are concerns about the requirement to take down information that others have posted about an individual; the definition of personal data in Article 4(2) includes "any information relating to" the individual. This, critics have claimed, would require companies to take down any information relating to an individual, regardless of its source, which would amount to censorship, and result in the big data companies eradicating a lot of data to comply with this. Such removal can impact the accuracy and ability of businesses and individuals to carry out business intelligence, particularly due diligence to comply with anti bribery, anticorruption, and know your customer laws. The right to be forgotten was invoked to remove from Google searches 120 reports about company directors published by Dato Capital, a Spanish company which compiles such reports about private company directors, consisting entirely of information they are required by law to disclose; Fortune magazine examined the 64 reports relating to UK directorships, finding that in 27 (42%) the director was the only person named, in the remaining only the director and co-directors were named, and 23 (36%) involve directorships started since 2012.

Other criticism revolves around the principle of accountability.

There were concerns that the proposed General Data Protection Regulation would result in Google and other Internet search engines not producing neutral search results, but rather producing biased and patchy results, and compromising the integrity of Internet-based information. To balance out this criticism, the proposed General Data Protection Regulation included an exception "for the processing of personal data carried out solely for journalistic purposes or the purpose of artistic or literary expression in order to reconcile the right to the protection of personal data with the rules governing freedom of expression." Article 80 upheld freedom of speech, and while not lessening obligations on data providers and social media sites, nevertheless due to the wide meaning of "journalistic purposes" allows more autonomy and reduces the amount of information that is necessary to be removed. When Google agreed to implement the ruling, European Commission Vice-President Viviane Reding said, "The Court also made clear that journalistic work must not be touched; it is to be protected." However, Google was criticized for taking down (under the Costeja precedent) a BBC News blog post about Stan O'Neal by economics editor Robert Peston (eventually, Peston reported that his blog post has remained findable in Google after all). Despite these criticisms and Google's action, the company's CEO, Larry Page worries that the ruling will be "used by other governments that aren't as forward and progressive as Europe to do bad things", though has since distanced himself from that position. For example, pianist Dejan Lazic cited the "Right To Be Forgotten" in trying to remove a negative review about his performance from The Washington Post. He claimed that the critique was "defamatory, mean-spirited, opinionated, offensive and simply irrelevant for the arts". and the St. Lawrence parish of the Roman Catholic church in Kutno, Poland asked Google to remove the Polish Wikipedia page about it,  without any allegations mentioned therein as of that date.

Index on Censorship claimed that the Costeja ruling "allows individuals to complain to search engines about information they do not like with no legal oversight. This is akin to marching into a library and forcing it to pulp books. Although the ruling is intended for private individuals it opens the door to anyone who wants to whitewash their personal history… The Court's decision is a retrograde move that misunderstands the role and responsibility of search engines and the wider Internet. It should send chills down the spine of everyone in the European Union who believes in the crucial importance of free expression and freedom of information."

In 2014, the Gerry Hutch page on the English Wikipedia was among the first Wikipedia pages to be removed by several search engines' query results in the European Union. The Daily Telegraph said, on 6 Aug 2014, that Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales "described the EU's Right to be Forgotten as deeply immoral, as the organisation that operates the online encyclopedia warned the ruling will result in an Internet riddled with memory holes". Other commentators have disagreed with Wales, pointing to problems such as Google including links to revenge porn sites in its search results, and have accused Google of orchestrating a publicity campaign to escape the burdensome obligation to comply with the law. Julia Powles, a law and technology researcher at the University of Cambridge, made a rebuttal to Wales' and the Wikimedia Foundation concerns in an editorial published by Guardian, opining that "There is a public sphere of memory and truth, and there is a private one...Without the freedom to be private, we have precious little freedom at all."

In response to the criticism, the EU has released a factsheet to address what it considers myths about the right to be forgotten. In addition to this, for further clarification of the law, the factsheet provides information about the pivotal court case C-131/12 and frequently asked questions regarding Google, the purpose of the law, and how it works.

Other criticisms involving the right to be forgotten revolves around the policies for data removal regarding minors. The U.S. has laws in place that protect the privacy of minors. The California Minor Eraser Law is a law that allows California residents under the age of 18 to request to have information removed that they posted on an online server. The law "applies to websites, social media sites, mobile apps and other online services" and follows "Europe's recognition of the 'right to be forgotten'". This law was put into effect on January 1, 2015 and remains in existence today. Online "service" operators that have services "directed toward minors" must update their privacy policies to include the option to remove data if requested by a minor that is posted on a service.

In the UK, the 2017 Conservative manifesto included a pledge to allow social media platform users to remove outdated information that was posted when they were under the age of 18. "A Tory victory on the 8th of June will lead to those youthful indiscretions on Facebook and Twitter being open to erasure. But there are also plans to fine social media firms for not moving at the speed of political opportunism over extreme content." The United Kingdom has not yet fully adopted the ruling of the European Court of Justice regarding the right to be forgotten and argued to keep it from going into EU law. However, in the upcoming elections in the UK laws could be passed to allow minors to remove embarrassing posts or photos on social media that could come back to affect job applications or public image in later life.

Theresa May, then Prime Minister of the UK, has pushed to extend privacy rights for minors in allowing them to have a right to delete information. The intentions for this extension of privacy are based on the fact that social media sites store years of data that affect minors lives' much later after the information is posted. May gave her stance on privacy when she said, "'The Internet has brought a wealth of opportunity but also significant new risks which have evolved faster than society's response to them'". The Conservative Party, which was headed by May from 2016 to 2019, has pushed for policies that aggressively remove illegal material from the Internet and fine firms that do not take action in removing said material.

In 2015, Commission nationale de l'informatique et des libertés (CNIL) asked Google to remove data from all versions available in any part of the world. Google and other entities argued that European data regulators should not be allowed to decide what Internet users around the world find when they use a search engine.

Research

Security researchers from CISPA, Saarland University and the University of Auckland proposed a framework, called Oblivion, to support the automation of the right to be forgotten in a scalable, provable and privacy-preserving manner. Oblivion is a program that helps to "automate" the process of attempting to verify someone's personal information that could be found in a Google search result." Google gets many take-down requests in a short amount of time, and Oblivion might help with this problem. Researchers and authors behind Oblivion say that "it is essential to develop techniques that at least partly automate this process and are scalable to Internet size." Oblivion helps the humans who review the forms at Google ensure that antagonistic users cannot "blacklist links to Internet sources that do not affect them." For example, tests have proven that Oblivion handles requests at a rate of 278 per second. The software allows Google, the government, and the user to work together to get content removed quickly and for just cause. In order to ensure that the program works quickly, is secure for its users and is impervious to fake take-down requests, Oblivion uses a three-part system.

In the first part, Oblivion requires a user to submit identification about themselves – not limited to "name, age, and nationality." Oblivion then enables a user to automatically find and tag his or her disseminated personal information using natural language processing and image recognition techniques and file a request in a privacy-preserving manner. Oblivion will scan the article for attributes that match information that has been submitted by the user. Second, Oblivion provides indexing systems with an automated and provable eligibility mechanism, asserting that the author of a request is indeed affected by an online resource. The author of a request is then issued an "ownership token" that confirms the articles they submitted for evaluation include sensitive personal information. The automated eligibility proof ensures censorship-resistance so that only legitimately affected individuals can request the removal of corresponding links from search results. In the third and last phase, this "ownership token" is submitted to Google, accompanied by the user's concerns as to what information should be deleted. Google's staff is then allowed to decide for themselves if they want to delete this information or not - but thanks to Oblivion, they know that the information in question is valid.

Researchers with Oblivion, however, have noted that it comes with some limitations. The software is lacking a human element, therefore it cannot decide on its own "whether or not a piece of information is public interest and should therefore not be removed from Google search results." Researchers have conducted comprehensive evaluations, showing that Oblivion is suitable for large-scale deployment once it is fine-tuned.

Data deletion protocols around the death of a user is another consideration.

See also
 Article 29 Working Party
 Fundamental rights
 Information privacy
 International human rights law
 Internet privacy
 Martin v. Hearst Corporation
 Right to disconnect
 Search engine privacy
 Thomas Goolnik
 Tiziana Cantone

References

Further reading

Articles

 Bennett, Steven C. "Right to be forgotten: Reconciling EU and US Perspectives, The." Berkeley J. Int'l L. 30 (2012): 161.
 Blackman, Josh. "Omniveillance, Google, Privacy in Public, and the Right to Your Digital Identity: A Tort for Recording and Disseminating an Individual's Image over the Internet." Santa Clara L. Rev. 49 (2009): 313.
 Bolton, Robert, "The Right to Be Forgotten: Forced Amnesia in a Technological Age," 31 J. Marshall J. Info. Tech. & Privacy L. 133 (2015).
 Castellano, Pere Simón. "The right to be forgotten under European Law: a Constitutional debate." (2012).

 Koops, E. J. "Forgetting footprints, shunning shadows: A critical analysis of the 'right to be forgotten' in big data practice." SCRIPTed 8, no. 3 (2011): 229-256.
 Palazzi, Pablo. "El reconocimiento en Europa del derecho al olvido en Internet." La Ley 10 de junio de 2014: (2014).
 Palazzi, Pablo. "Derecho al olvido en Internet e información sobre condenas penales (a propósito de un reciente fallo holandés)." La Ley 17 de diciembre de 2014: (2014).
 Rosen, Jeffrey. "The right to be forgotten." Stanford law review online 64 (2012): 88.
 Simeonovski, Milivoj; Bendun, Fabian; Asghar, Muhammad Rizwan; Backes, Michael; Marnau, Ninja; Druschel, Peter. "Oblivion: Mitigating Privacy Leaks by Controlling the Discoverability of Online Information." The 13th International Conference on Applied Cryptography and Network Security (ACNS 2015).
 Gallo Sallent, Juan Antonio; "El Derecho al Olvido en Internet: Del Caso Google al Big Data" (2015) (ed.): CreateSpace,, Barcelona, España. .
 Tsesis, Alexander. "The Right to Erasure: Privacy and the Indefinite Retention of Data", 49 Wake Forest Law Review 433 (2014).

Books

 Ausloos, Jef (2020). The Right to Erasure in EU Data Protection Law. Oxford University Press. .

Cases
 Melvin v. Reid 112 Cal.App. 285, 297 P. 91 (1931)
 Sidis v F-R Publishing Corporation 311 U.S. 711 61 S. Ct. 393 85 L. Ed. 462 1940 U.S.
 Google Spain, S.L., Google Inc. y Agencia Española de Protección de Datos (AEPD), Mario Costeja González ECLI:EU:C:2014:317

Legislation
 Directive 95/46/EC on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data. EU Directive 1995.
 European Commission. Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Protection of Individuals with Regard to the Processing of Personal Data and On the Free Movement of Such Data (General Data Protection Regulation). 2012/0011 (COD). Article 3. "Territorial Scope."

External links
Google's 'Search removal request under European Data Protection law' form
Yahoo's Right to be Forgotten Request page
Bing's European Privacy Request form
List of European Data Protection Authorities (for appeals)
Guidelines on the implementation of the Court of Justice of the European Union judgment on Google Spain and inc v. Agencia Española de Protección de Datos (AEPD) and Mario Costeja González
Factsheet on the "Right to be Forgotten" ruling (C-131/12)
Google's Transparency Report (statistics and examples)
Report of the Advisory Council to Google on the Right to be Forgotten
Google's responses to the Questionnaire addressed to Search Engines by the Article 29 Working Party
List of BBC web pages which have been removed from Google's search results
Telegraph stories affected by EU 'right to be forgotten'
The Right to Be Forgotten: Forced Amnesia in a Technological Age
The Right to be Forgotten
 Understand Your Privacy Rights

Human rights
Internet and the European Union
Internet privacy
Freedom of expression
Privacy controversies and disputes
Internet censorship


These are extremely thick, smooth and stretchy backdrops, perfect for those newborn photographers who love a clean look. We always make sure that our backdrops are stretchy enough to pull out wrinkles and soft enough to put a baby on.
This product is ready to ship, unless otherwise noted. We strive to ship our orders within 24-48 hours of your order being placed.


text:
John Stevenson
Rick Wilson
John Tesh Intelligence For Your Life
Advertise on The Eagle!
Dr. Fauci announces the Omicron variant has been detected in U.S. for the first time, with confirmed case in California
December 2, 2021 Staff News Daypop
Public health official and President Joe Biden's chief medical adviser Dr. Anthony Fauci confirmed on Wednesday that the first case of the Omicron variant of COVID-19 has been identified in the United States.
Speaking during a White House press briefing, Fauci said the case was found in California, adding that the patient traveled from South Africa to San Francisco on Nov. 22 and tested positive for COVID-19 on Monday. Fauci said: "The individual is self-quarantining and all close contacts have been contacted and all close contacts, thus far, have tested negative. The individual was fully vaccinated and experienced mild symptoms, which are improving at this point. So this is the first confirmed case of COVID-19 caused by the Omicron variant detected in the United States."
The World Health Organization designated the Omicron variant a "variant of concern" last Friday after it was first identified in South Africa. The organization said Omicron has a large number of mutations and may spread at faster rates than other variants. News of the variant's spread prompted countries across the globe to shut down travel from certain areas of Africa, though it has been detected in European countries.
Biden on Monday sought to calm fears about the new variant, saying that current vaccines should be adequate to combat Omicron, and added that it was a "cause for concern, not a cause for panic." Vaccine makers said that they are testing their COVID-19 vaccines against the new variant, saying it may require new boosters that can target the strain.
InterTech Media
© 2022 The Eagle - WLXR Powered by OneCMS™ | Served by InterTech Media LLC
89eafa51616fbe2c525ac843920fd28d5ceb6336

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


It is no longer a big deal to see youngsters on roller blades skate past your car in traffic in Lagos, often time dropping one flyer or the other in your car. Personally, I am of the opinion that it is quite dangerous as the area is not controlled and a car could hit them.
So imagine my appreciation to find out that there is actually a safe place where ANYONE can try out all their James Bond skating theaterics in a controlled environment right here in Maryland, Lagos!
Skate City is the number one skating rink in Lagos where the young and young at heart can actually skate away to their heart's content and if you fall down....well, you will get right up! Lol! Aunty Bimbo Kids Club usually organises exclusive weekend hangouts for children but parents are usually welcome to join us and my kids and I decided to check out Skate City which is located at Maryland Mall the latest 'Shoprite' as some people like to call it.
I found out that Skate City is actually the first skating rink built within a mall in Nigeria and it's been uniquely designed to embrace safety and ultimate skating performance. Its perfect for beginners, expert and recreational skaters alike.
That, I can personally confirm as I took a ride on the hoverboard and from the video above, it was a seriously hands-on experience with my hoverboard babysteps! Anyone from age 4 can be allowed to skate and training is also available although my 11 year old boy started doing shakara after just a few minutes of being taught and he was already running circles around me!
Asides the secure and environmentally friendly space, Skate City also offers rental skates service and other skating merchandise are available for personal purchase.The Skate City Management team also provide outdoor skating rinks for outdoor skating events, school events and birthday parties. Infact one of my friends after seeing me on the hoverboard is already planning to have them come set up for her 40th birthday....hehehehe!
Another highlight for me is their Skate City Club which anyone can join at a very affordable fee so what are you still waiting for? Come Roll with it!
N.B If you would like to be our Feature Place Of The Week, kindly send an email to bimbo@auntybimbokidsworld.com Lets announce you to the world with first-hand personal experience! You can visit www.auntybimbokidsworld.com to check out other places we have featured!


It was balmy here in Maine yesterday, around 50 degrees. We took advantage of the nice weather to get a few outside chores finished up. Mr Chiots washed the cars and I cleaned out the duck ponds.
Breakfast was overnight French toast with maple syrup, then we watched Christmas Vacation. There wasn't a big fancy meal, we had a meat/cheese plate and some wine. Then off to the neighbor's house for desert, I baked Bourbon Pecan Pie to take.
A handmade terracotta egg crate for all those lovely eggs laid by our chickens. Truth be told I could use about 5 of these in the summer when I'm getting a dozen eggs a day. This will be perfect to have sitting on the counter to keep the eggs within easy reach.
Mr Chiots is always complaining of congestion the day after spending time on the tractor or cutting/splitting firewood. A Respro mask seemed like a perfect gift. It's supposed to be super comfortable and the filters keep out the toxic fumes from diesel and small engines along with small particulates.
Mr Chiots is always complaining of lint & cat hair on his clothes, I found this wonderful wood & rubber lint brush made my redecker. It works very well and now there is no longer a need to buy those sticky lint rollers.
Our neighbor made us these sweet little felted bacon ornaments. Handmade gifts are the best of all and these are so cute!
Mr Chiots has been in need of a new set of hair clippers. After going through a cheap set every year or so, I decided it was time to invest in a professional pair that should last for years to come. After much research, the Oster Classic 76 was the pair I selected. They are made in the USA and get great reviews. If you have someone who cuts their own hair, this would be a fabulous gift!
Being a Tolkien fan, this new book of his art was a perfect gift for Mr Chiots. This was actually purchased as a birthday gift (which is in January), but one of his Christmas gifts didn't get finished in time. So it will be given at Christmas and this was given now.
We've been needing new outdoor thermometers, ours are falling apart and not accurate at all. Now we have a large French enameled thermometer that should give us accurate temperature measurements.
Mr Chiots also got me a Kindle for Christmas, definitely not a gift I've been pining for. I'm a tactile person and love the feel of an actual book, though it will be nice to get Kindle books from the library. It will also come in handy when I travel, I'm usually stuffing five or six books in my bag, now I can have an entire library in my purse.
All of my kitchen towels are getting old and warn, we did get most of them for our wedding sixteen years ago. Mr Chiots got me a few waffle weave linen towels from Fog Linen. When it comes to kitchen textiles linen is the best since it gets softer, more absorbent, and better with age.
Last but not least was the lovely men's grooming kit I got for Mr Chiots. He's always been meticulous when it comes to keeping his nails cleaned and trimmed. He has this really crappy set of nail clippers, the kind you get at a gas station for 99 cents. Now he has a lovely set that will last the rest of his life!
What did you find beneath your tree yesterday?
From all of us at Chiot's Run, we hope you have a wonderful Christmas Eve and Christmas day.
We'll be doing what we usually do, watching James Bond, hiking, eating cookies, and relaxing. We hope you enjoy the same. See you on Saturday!
Both of my small 'Hedgehog' aloes are blooming. The flowers are rather insignificant, but quite lovely in their simplicity. I love that they come this time of year when the garden outside my window is devoid of color.
This particular plant lives on my beside table. It's nice to know that it not only brings beauty to my room, but it also cleans the air as well.
These two plants were pups from the big aloes that I had on my front porch back in Ohio. They're spectacular plants when grown in large containers. I left one for my neighbor, it lives in her living room now. Mine came to Maine and I harvested pups the first winter because I didn't have space for the giant pot.
The photo above was when I first planted them. When we finally moved they were about twice as big and they were stunning! I really love the structure of the aloe plants, the shape of the leaves, the fleshiness , and the thorns. They are very artistic in their form.
It will take a few more years, but these little beauties will once again become large spotlight plants in my garden. By then hopefully I'll have a better space for overwintering large tender plants. Until then, they'll live with minimal fertilizer and water to keep them growing as slowly as possible.
Do you grow any succulents indoors during the winter?
These two turkeys of ours have become my sidekicks. They wait for me to come outside every day and follow me around while I work. They sing their sweet little songs and are highly entertaining! Turkeys are definitely birds that we love having around.
We're fairly sure that we ended up with two hens, so I'll be looking for a tom with hopes of having a breeding trio next year. Or maybe one of them will go broody and I can put some fertile eggs under her. I'd love to end up with a small flock of Wishard Bronze turkeys that can raise their own young each year. This is one of the best parts of having a little bit of land, experimenting with new birds has been a lot of fun!
If had space for lots of animals what would you have on your farm?
Atavism [at–uh-viz-uhm] noun – the reappearance in an individual of characteristics of some remote ancestor that have been absent in intervening generations.
Yesterday we spent the day butchering our pigs. They were slaughtered last Saturday and hung on our back porch during the week. Neil came back yesterday and we cut, ground, salted, and packaged up the meat. We got them almost 100% processed. The only thing I have left is one type of ham brine to mix/boil. That's quite a feat, last year I spent an entire week working on this process.
As we worked I thought about all the older people I have met recently that have told me about how they remember slaughtering hogs when they were kids. My grandfather's wife was one of those people. She spent a long time telling me about how they used to raise 5-6 hogs each year to feed the family (she had a lot of brothers & sisters). Back then they grew food because they had to, now we do it because we want to.
Have you experienced talking to people from previous generations about their memories of growing/raising their own food?


Anu Joshi is the Senior Director of Immigrant Rights Policy at the New York Immigration Coalition where she leads the organization's work on issues relating to immigration status and enforcement. She has worked for over seven years in the immigrant rights movement, including with the Center for New Community in Chicago and the American Immigration Lawyers Association in Washington, D.C. Previously, Anu organized around issues relating to access to education and foreign policy and spent three years as a child services social worker in the Bay Area. She has her Masters in Social Welfare from UC Berkeley.


Munster lock Paul O'Connell has been named as captain for the British & Irish Lions in the opening tour match against the Barbarians on Saturday.
Lock O'Connell is well experienced with the role having captained the 2009 Lions tour to South Africa and it was a "very eaay decision" according to Lions Head Coach Warren Gatland.
Tour Captain Sam Warburton was ruled out of the match as a precautionary measure following a steroid injection to treat a minor knee ligament injury.
The side named to face the Barbarian features seven former tourists with O'Connell and the welsh trio of Jamie Roberts, Mike Phillips and Adam Jones all starting, and Matt Stevens, Alun Wyn Jones and Jamie Heaslip on the bench.
All three Scots on the trip, Richie Gray, Sean Maitland and Stuart Hogg, are starting the match.


China High Quality Mining Spiral Classifier For Gold Mine Buyer , Find . Mine Buyer,Spiral Classifier,High Performance Spiral Classifier,Design Classifier from Mineral Separator Supplier or Manufacturer Weihai Haiwang Mining Equipment Co., Ltd. . New. Type: spiral classifier. Production Capacity: 98%. Place of Origin:.
spiral separator price. High Performance Gravity Separating Spiral Chute Separator . High Efficient Mining Factory Price Screw Spiral Chute Separator for Gold Mining . Competitive Price FG10 Gold Spiral Separator/Spiral Classifier For Ore Dressing Plant . Made in China products spiral chute,spiral separator price.
Alibaba offers 16284 gold mining plant products. . Condition: New High Efficiency Screw Classifier/Spiral Classifier For Gold Ore Mining Plant.
Double or Single Spiral Log Washer/Spiral Screw Classifier/gold washing . Condition: New; Type: mining washer; Production Capacity: 10 100t/h; Place of Origin: . capacity, convenient installation, simple operation, low cost, high efficiency.
Atairac Engineered Products Inc (China). US $30000 90000 / Set . high efficiency screw classifier spiral machine sand screw spiral classifier air classifie. Add to Compare .. Hot sale spiral classifier new design,spiral classifier with high capacity . Gold classifying equipment/gold spiral classifier for ore processing industry.
Fg Sand Ore Spiral Mineral Screw Classifier , Find Complete Details about Fg . New. Type: sprial classifier, high weir type mining classfier. Production Capacity: . The spiral with low speed rotation stirs the slurry, so that the fine particles rice.
Double Or Single Spiral Log Washer/spiral Screw Classifier/gold Washing . New. Type: mining washer. Production Capacity: 10 100t/h. Place of Origin: . with large capacity, convenient installation, simple operation, low cost, high efficiency.
Alibaba offers 561 spiral classifier price products. . Condition: New High weir Stone Sand Screw Small Mineral Spiral Classifier Machine Price for . Low Consumption Lowest Price Gold Ore Spiral Classifier with High Efficiency.
Air Classifier, Wholesale Various High Quality Air Classifier Products from Global Air Classifier Suppliers and Air . high efficiency screw classifier spiral machine sand screw spiral classifier air classifie .. New type vertical single rotor air classifier . Gold classifying equipment/gold spiral classifier for ore processing industry.
Spiral Sieve Screen, Wholesale Various High Quality Spiral Sieve Screen Products from Global Spiral Sieve Screen Suppliers and Spiral Sieve Screen . Tags: Screw Conveyor . Portable Conveying Equipment . Low Power Vibration Machine. . Trommel Screen . Gold Washing Plant Gold Mining Spiral Classifier Machine.
Cheap China mineral sand process plant Products and Suppliers Directory Source lots of . spiral screw sand wash machine for mineral processing plant.
. and gravel classifier. High efficiency mini gold washing plant clay sand gravel classifier log washer .. Screw Spiral Classifying Equipment, Stone Washing Machine, Spiral Sand Classifier . Mining high weir sand gold gravel spiral classifier for ore beneficiation . 1 YRS Jiangsu Hewa Screening Product Co., Ltd. 100%.
Hot sale High capacity professional ball mill for grinding gold ores. US $3000 . New Type High Efficiency Mineral Processing Sand High Weir Submerged Spiral Classifier. US $1500 .. 2018 New Products Coal Mine Equipment Stone Impact Crusher Price . Mineral Separator Sand Screw Spiral Classifier Manufacturer.
High performance spiral sand classifier sand water separator. US $4500.0 4500.0 / Set .. best price tin ore spiral separator / gravity spiral chute/sand spiral classifier . spiral water classifier for sand washing machine screw classifier. US $1 999 / Piece .. Trending products spiral used sand filter classifier water separator.
New Products . 2017 New Arrival Hot Selling High Efficient Rod Mill Grinding Mill Energy . Gold Mining Equipment Ore Classifying Mining Spiral Screw Classifier . China High Efficiency Mining Equipment Mixing Agitator Tank Chemical.
Report on expertise, capacity, production & certification. View More . Gravity gold ore spiral classifier machine working principle · Gravity gold ore spiral . New Designed Lignite Rotary Dryer Furnace .. high efficiency rock breaker, stone crushing machine, jaw crusher .. Double Screw Spiral Classifier for Ore Processing.
8692 products . Single/Double Screw High Weir/Immersed Spiral Classifier Mine Separator China High Efficiency Tantalum Ore Spiral Chute Separator.
Sand ore washing equipment spiral classifier in mineral processing plant. MOQ: 1 . Mineral Processing/Gold Production Equipment Spiral Classifier . Mineral Processing Equipment Mine Iron Ore Sand Gravel Single Screw Spiral Classifier Mining . 2018 High efficiency minerals processing spiral chute equipment for gold.
Condition: New. Add to Favorites. 6 Photos . World hot sale spiral classifier factory ,stone washing machine price . High Efficiency Screw Classifier/Spiral Classifier For Gold Ore Mining Plant . Production Capacity: 30 160m³/d for overflo.


text:
Sometimes You Don't Need a Critique
I want to send one of my stories (6 page of containing outline, show summary, story headlines, characters directions and derivations, show themes that lead the entire series ) a "Tv concept idea" contest in L.A.
I get some script consulting about it such as " it will be not a bad idea for TV " from a reputable blogger .He says that the core idea is interesting and the concept has some potential for future episodes, but the only thing is my language barrier .
I know my english as a second language will not be sufficient to write in english like an american fellow even I know all about TV show business ; ... Would you suggest me to get another idea from another guy of business or stick the consulting and suggestions of him ? at least before sanding my outline for the contest.
I am also work for TV time to time in my country, I know everybody says lots of things, usually of non sense to make money esp. in this business.
I want to learn what is the criteria to have "story by" credits, especially on tv. ...
Realistically, the only way for someone to sell a TV concept if English is not his or her first language is to make the series in his own language and then sell the format. For example, the Israeli series PRISONERS OF WAR (חטופים) became HOMELAND; the Israeli series בטיפול (IN THERAPY) which became IN TREATMENT and a dozen other series in different languages; the Dutch series BIG BROTHER which became a metastatized cancer afflicting the entire television medium.
If a paid evaluator says "This will not be a bad idea for TV," I think they are maybe taking your money. That's about the smallest possible thing someone can say about a TV concept. On the rare occasions I read something that really could work, I say, "I think this really has a shot."
(Though generally when I'm evaluating other people's material, I don't say whether it's good or bad; I generally say how to make it better. I don't think it's helpful to say, "This stinks." If you want me to tell you if it's good or bad, you have to ask. The truthful answer, however, is usually, "It's not good now. If you do everything I tell you, and do it well, then I think you have a shot.")
The criterion for getting a guaranteed "Story By" credit in the US under WGA rules is to have written the first draft of the pilot. ("Story by" is the irreducible minimum credit for the original writer.) If you're not a native English speaker, or Vladimir Nabokov, the odds are they won't let you write any draft of the pilot; and they won't read your spec pilot, either. However if you write the pilot in your native language, and sell the format, then you can negotiate something like a "Based on the series PRISONERS OF WAR created by Gideon Rafi."
So, Compulsion Games will soon be hiring a community manager. This is a full-time contract job in our Montreal office keeping up with the people who play (or might play) our games. That means writing back to gamers when they have questions, posting on forums, responding to posts on forums, tweeting and generally making us look awesome. It's about engaging with our community to better understand what they think and feel about our games and help us make better ones.
There will be some dealing with the game media. There might theoretically be a bit of game writing, if you are so inclined, but that's not the priority.
The ideal person is witty and irrepressible. S/he plays a lot of video games and likes to talk about them. S/he probably reads the game press (Kotaku, RPS, etc.) S/he understands social media. We're not looking for a degree in marketing, but we would be impressed by your clever and provocative Twitter feed and your mob of followers.
Compulsion is an indie game company of about a dozen really dedicated developers. Our previous game, Contrast, was a PS4 launch title, passes the Bechdel test, and is shortlisted for 10 Canadian Video Game Awards. Our new game may blow your mind.
If you think you might be the right person for this, email my buddy Sam Abbott at jobs@compulsiongames.com.
You Don't Climb a Mountain
A reader writes:
Q. I'm wondering how fast I should write screenplays if I want to be successful. I want to hit that sweet spot. I understand that pieces of string come in varying lengths. My first took me two months, my second took me two weeks, and my third has taken me two months already and I'm only on page 19. It's probably just a bad story idea and I should probably move on, but I know that in TV writing you are forced to do things you don't want to do.
I've got several non-starters like this. If I were to force myself to finish any one of them, do you think the material would come out best if I went with a fast (2 week), medium (1.5 month), or slow (>3 month) speed for the first first draft? By "best" I of course mean most sellable. I understand that you offer no guarantees, etc. You have advised to plan for a better story in advance, but I do indeed feel pressured to tell a certain (original) story a certain way and would like to just plow through it, I'm just unsure of the speed guidelines.
Every writer is different. Robert Towne takes a year to write a script. I have no idea how he manages to spend a year on a single script. I'm assuming a lot of golf is involved. I usually write a feature first draft in about 24 days. I spend time conceptualizing and outlining, then I write the first draft pretty fast, and then rewriting takes however long it takes. Years, sometimes, with long gaps in between while producers look for money or I wait for perspective.
Both my wife and I find that having a completed script makes rewriting much easier and less stressful. She calls her first draft the "vomit" draft because she just wants to get it out of her system, and it doesn't look pretty.
Joss Whedon writes all the fun scenes first, then writes the scenes that connect them.
If you're on page 19 after two months, something is wrong with your outline. Go back to index cards, or better, go back to telling your story out loud.
The amount of time you spend on a first draft has nothing to do with how sellable the script is. The script is sellable if it has a great hook and good implementation. The hook is in the outline, and the implementation is in the first draft, and the second, and the third, and so on.
The key is that you don't climb a mountain. You take one step up. Then another step up.
You don't write a script. You write an outline. Then you write pages. By pages, I mean scenes. You only write one scene at a time.
Look at the scene you're writing. Who wants what? Why does the other person not want to give it to him? What does the first person say or do to try to get it? What does the second person want? Why won't the first person give it to her? What does she say and do to try to get it?
If you can answer those questions, you ought to be able to write the scene. If you can't answer these questions, there's why you're hung up on page 19.
Sometimes the reason you can't write the scene is that it's boring and doesn't need to be in the movie. Skip it and see if you miss it. Maybe you're telling it wrong. Maybe find another way to present the story elements in the scene. Try writing the scene as a silent movie. Try writing the scene as a phone conversation. Try writing the scene as a scene from a novel. Try having one character refuse to talk. Rewrite the scene as the couple arguing while they're at a cocktail party. Try having the scene happen offscreen and we only find out about it in a conversation with third parties. Try writing the scene with a different outcome than you expected and see if that feels more truthful. Rewrite the scene as all subtext, with everyone saying exactly what's on their minds. Now rewrite with no one saying any subtext at all -- they're refusing to talk about what they mean and want, and talking about anything but.
Get some actor friends to do an improv based on the scene. If you don't have actor friends, do it with your own friends. If you don't have friends, take each person's part and see what they say.
Why does that scene need to exist? How does it move the plot forward? How does it reveal character? A scene should ideally do both. If it's sagging, it's probably either not moving the plot forward, or you've written it so that the characters are saying and doing the things any normal people would say and do, rather than things only those characters could say or do.
I'm a big believer in finishing scripts even if they feel like they suck. Around page 40, they almost always do feel like they suck. But I would never write a script without writing a solid outline first. That's like getting in the car and driving without a destination. You think you're going to wind up some place you never expected, but you usually end up at the supermarket.


text:
The story behind our name and logo
Morrow Lane was founded by Jennifer Morrow Eident, a leading expert in digital marketing. Our founders and team of experts have proven track records of building, executing and leading innovative strategies with breakthrough results for high-growth companies. In addition to our leadership team we have a talented team of graphic designers, engineers, social media mavens, SEO experts and writers.
Morrow Lane, LLC takes its name from Jennifer's inspiration, the Morrow women of her family, including her mother, grandmother and in memory of her ancestor, Anne Morrow Lindbergh. As the wife of famed aviator Charles Lindbergh, Anne didn't need to make a name for herself. But she did. In 1930, when the belief that women belonged in the home was particularly strong, Anne became the first American woman to earn a glider pilot's license. Anne's accomplishments might have ended there, or after the horrifying kidnapping of her first child, but they didn't. She went on to write many successful and highly-acclaimed books, including best-sellers and a winner of the inaugural National Book Award. Anne was considered a visionary and leader of the nascent environmental movement.
"Great names beget great brands, but great people make the world for themselves. Anne Morrow was one of these: indomitable in spirit, forever aspiring to greater heights, and keenly aware of the changing world."
Morrow Lane's logo, a biplane, is a symbol of Anne Morrow's courage as well as the groundbreaking innovation in aviation achieved by Jennifer's grandfather, Ray Leoni, as chief designer and engineer of the the Black Hawk helicopter, that has saved countless lives.
Our name and logo symbolize our team's promise to aspire to the heights pioneered by these individuals and our commitment to the lofty goal of redefining the marketing industry.


text:
CW Games
Games & Downloads
Stats Spider
TEAM SITES >>
Four Of The Best Freddie Flintoff England Moments
by: Cricket Web Team
There aren't many cricketers that have been able to ensure international investment in the sport, but Freddie Flintoff broke that mould. Flintoff made for must-see action, as he was a star that everybody would be talking about after an England fixture. Even those that weren't huge cricket fans would tune in to see what Flintoff is doing, and he played a huge role in the popularity of the sport increasing in the 2000s.
Beginner's Guide to Betting on Cricket
Cricket dates as far back as the 18th century and is considered one of the oldest sports still in operation in a league. If you're a fan of the sport and you're interested in betting on it, you can use our blog post as a helpful resource. In this guide, we will guide you through the information you'll need to grow your betting strategy to maximize your potential gains.
Cricket sportsbooks: review these three features right away
Betting on cricket can be both fun and profitable and picking the right sportsbook is at least half the reason why. Fans have access to a plethora of books both new and old. These books compete against each other offering all kinds of perks and promotions. But how do you tell exactly if a sportsbook will be good for betting on cricket?
Cricket is one of the Most Popular Sports in UK.
The Brits are known for their love of football. However, Cricket is gaining significant ground as one of the most popular sports in the United Kingdom.
Players To Watch In The Indian Premier League This Season
The Indian Premier League is one of the most entertaining sporting competitions in the world, and due to that, there are a number of players that fans tune in to see for every game during the season. Over the 12 previous instalments of the competition to date, there have been some of the biggest names in the sport involved in the IPL, and that will be no different this season. But, which players should fans' be watching in the IPL this season?
Recent Site News
The winners and losers from cricket in 2020
Looking Back: The top cricket stories of 2020
How to Use Free Bets on Cricket
Cricket, and How it Can Help Increase Workplace Productivity
Top 5 Tips for Betting on a Cricket
james test
Archived Site News
Do you have a strong interest in cricket and are interested in contributing to Cricket Web in a writer/developer/graphic design type role?
If so, please register your details here, and one of our management team will be in touch.
APPLY FOR ROLE
HomeBlogs
Cricket Games News
Book ReviewsCW Games
CW Cricket
CW Cricket Quiz
CW Hangman
CW Memory
CW Crosswords
Cricket Chat
CoachingHistory
Most Popular Cricket Games
Cricket Game Reviews
Shareware Cricket Games
Copyright © Cricket Web


The Frontera Women's Foundation decided to work with junior year students at Bowie High School to encourage them to apply for our college scholarship program. Eligible students must have a C average (2.0) GPA or above and have a desire to go to college. They must complete the application and return to their school counselor by MARCH 28, 2012.
Scholarship winners receive notification as they enter their senior year in High School. When the students show documentation of high school graduation and college enrollment, FWF distributes the scholarship award directly to the college or university.
FWF Board members will be available to the students to offer guidance and assistance in completing additional Scholarship Applications throughout their Junior and Senior years.
It is our hope that this project will be an incentive for students to complete High School and reach for their goals in higher education.


text:
Żeltau (Góry Czu-Ilijskie; kaz.: Желтау, Żeltau; ros.: Чу-Илийские горы, Czu-Ilijskije gory) – góry w Tienszanie Północnym, we wschodniej części Kazachstanu, na północny zachód od Ałatau Zailijskiego. Rozciągają się na długości ok. 220 km, najwyższy szczyt osiąga 1294 m n.p.m. Zbudowane z granitów, łupków, wapieni i skał gipsonośnych. Porośnięte roślinnością pustynno-stepową.

Przypisy

Góry Kazachstanu
Azja Centralna

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
Columbus Zoo & Aquarium
Address: 4850 West Powell Road
Toll free: (800) MON-KEYS
details events
Stay in one of Dublin, Ohio hotels for a short and simple commute to the #1 Zoo in the nation -- the Columbus Zoo and Aquarium. The Columbus Zoo and Aquarium was made famous by director emeritus "Jungle Jack" Hanna's memorable appearances on the David Letterman Show and Good Morning America.
The Zoo rests on hundreds of acres of naturalistic wildlife habitats and includes the Zoombezi Bay Waterpark and Safari Golf Club. The Zoo features nine world regions representing over 800 species and is one of only three facilities outside of Florida to exhibit and rehabilitate the endangered West Indian manatee.
Discover the Australia Region by walking through the outdoor kangaroo yard and hand-feeding the colorful birds in the lorikeet garden. Go on a simulated forest night hike where nocturnal tree kangaroos, dog-faced bats, kiwi, clouded leopards and other animals are at home.Asia Quest recreates a visit to China -- with Amur tigers, Red Pandas and a Pheasant Aviary. Experience the Heart of Africa and get up close and personal with the animals like you never have before. Ride a camel, hand feed giraffes and watch the cheetahs cubs learn their speed from their parents. The 43-acre region takes guests to another world as you walk through Mudiwa Village and Ajabu National Park.
One of the Zoo's most entertaining regions is the Polar Frontier exhibit. Meet the Zoo's polar bears and watch them dive to depths of 16 feet of water or swim over your head through a half-tunnel of acrylic viewing glass.
Stop by The Zoo's newest attraction in the Shores Play Park -- the 4D Theater -- to get immersed into a movie.
The Columbus Zoo & Aquarium is offering half priced admission now through February. Children under 3 are free and do not require a ticket. Note: Select...
Half Priced Admission at the Columbus Zoo
Date: 1/08/2020 - 2/29/2020
In honor of Martin Luther King Jr., the Columbus Zoo & Aquarium is offering FREE admission to all who visit on that day! Parking is $10 per vehicle. Snow is...
Martin Luther King Jr. Day at The Zoo
With tons of activities for kids, food, live music and a silent auction, there is something for everyone at the 2019 Chilly Open. Organized by the Westerville...
Chilly Open
In honor of all our presidents, the Columbus Zoo & Aquarium is offering FREE admission to all who visit on this day! Parking is $10 per vehicle. Snow is no...
President's Day at the Columbus Zoo & Aquarium


Luxury floral subscription service H.Bloom $4.7 million led by Battery Ventures with participation from existing angel investors, including Brian Lee, the founder of ShoeDazzle and LegalZoom; and Anton Levy, partner at General Atlantic, and board member of Gilt Groupe. This brings H.Bloom's total funding to $8 million.
H.Bloom is hoping to disrupt the online floral delivery service by offering floral subscription plans at affordable rates. Their basic package is $30 per floral bundle (including shipping) and can be delivered on a weekly, monthly or bi-monthly basis.
And the service delivers designer-quality arrangements (made by professional designers), to both residential and business customers, for approximately 70 percent off traditional floral boutique pricing. The startup serves New York City, Washington DC, and as of September 1st, Chicago.
The flower industry is a $32 billion flower market, explains Bryan Burkhart, co-founder and CEO, and is ripe for innovation. Retailers have to pay for expensive store-fronts and an overwhelming percentage of flowers that spoil before a customer can purchase them. H.Bloom can offer competitive pricing by working directly with the growers, cutting out traditional overhead expenses and relying on the subscription plan model, which requires 7-day notice for cancellations. H.Bloom only orders flowers they need for set customer orders.
The subscription model seems to be working. The startup has seen revenue double every other quarter since its launch in April 2010. And the company only wastes around 1 percent of its inventory. Burkhart says that the response from commercial customers, such as those who want florals in their office space, is particularly positive.
H.Bloom will apply the new funds to hiring, expanding into new markets, and investing in sales and marketing.


text:
Q: Variable access weirdness in a QObject derivative The code below is supposed to print the same thing three times. Why does it not?
from PySide.QtCore import QObject

class A(QObject):
    instance = 1

    @classmethod
    def test(cls):
        cls.instance  # Remove this line and it prints the right thing
        cls.instance = cls()
        print(cls.__dict__['instance'])
        print(cls.instance)
        print(type.__getattribute__(cls, 'instance'))

A.test()

Expected result:
<__main__.A object at 0x1310c20>
<__main__.A object at 0x1310c20>
<__main__.A object at 0x1310c20>

Actual result:
<__main__.A object at 0x2242878>
1
1

The metaclass behind QObject doesn't even override getattribute so how is it possible that I'm not getting the A instance back with "cls.instance"?
Even stranger is that not accessing the attribute (see the commented code line) before assigning it makes it work fine.
I can reproduce this as follows (with PySide 1.1.0):

*

*Windows 7 64-bit, Python 2.7.1 32-bit: works

*Windows 7 64-bit, Python 2.7.3 32-bit: works

*Windows 7 64-bit, Python 3.2.3 32-bit: fails

*Ubuntu 11.10 64-bit, Python 2.7.2+: works

*Ubuntu 11.10 64-bit, Python 3.2.2: fails

Update: I managed to compile PySide 1.1.1 on Python 3.2.2 on Ubuntu, and it does not fix the problem.

A: I can confirm this on Python 3.2.3 / PySide 1.1.0, Ubuntu 12.04. Works with PyQt4 on the same installation.
This is defenitely a bug in PySide. You should file a bug report, if you haven't already done so.
If I only change the example a little, the example even segfaults:
from PySide.QtCore import *

class A(QObject):
    instance = []

    @classmethod
    def test(cls):
        print(cls.instance)
        cls.instance = cls()
        print(cls.__dict__['instance'])
        print("still ok")
        print(cls.instance)
        print("you won't see me")
        print(type.__getattribute__(cls, 'instance'))

A.test()

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


SKU: 16367 Categories: Art, Limited Editions Tag: Silhouettes.
First Edition,4to. pp.64.Profusely illustrated. .SIgnature on ffe. else Very Good in original decorated papered boards quarter cloth in original clear acetate wrapper.
Designed by Sebastian Carter and printed by Sebastian and Will Carter at The Rampant Lions Press , Cambridge .The paper is St Paul's Cray Rag Paper.


text:
Sunreef Yachts introduces the biggest Sunreef yacht and the biggest luxury catamaran in the world to date.
A press release from Sunreef. Thanks Ewa.
26 June 2008,
Gdansk, Poland - With two superyachts, the Sunreef 102 Double Deck and the Sunreef 114, already under construction, Sunreef Yachts announces its latest design, the 150 foot ONE FIFTY by Sunreef coming in response to what the company sees as a continuing demand for the special combination of luxury and performance offered uniquely by a catamaran.
''Over the years we've seen an increasing interest in bigger luxury cats and have been expanding our range incrementally to accomodate that,'' said Nicolas Lapp, Sunreef vice-president, ''The ONE FIFTY is now a quantum leap reflecting our customers enquries."
Developed by Sunreef's own in-house design team, the ONE FIFTY design is unique from other yachts in Sunreef fleet not only in size but also in appearance.
The futurist look of the ONE FIFTY as a result of meticulous research of the latest trends and styles in exterior design. Externally, the concept was for a modern, sweeping, sleek topside which blends into the curve of the hulls resulting in flat surfaces that accomodate solar panels as an alternative cheap and green source of energy or are covered by uncut, continously applied teak in keeping with the sleek lines.
The main deck features a spacious covered area spread over two levels spanning the entire beam (over 17 meters) with sloping deck leading up to the giant flybridge and navigation station just aft of the 55 metre carbon-fibre mast. The boom doubles as a crane for the rescue boat or for a large tender to be stowed out of sight, aft of the engine room.
In a break with tradition, the cockpit, which is sheltered by a sunroof, has been moved forward and equipped with sunbeds, a dining table seating twelve as well as comfortable informal seating on cushions and wicker armchairs. Despite the unique location, the cockpit will be accessible from both the flybridge via an open staircase and from salon/staterooms via two doors.
Below decks, twelve guests can be accomodated comfortably in six double staterooms located on the main deck forward and in the starboard hull. Crew quarters for eight are segregated in the opposite hull. A special lift will connect serve the galley on the upper deck and the crew quarters and store rooms below.
A large salon with a lounge bar and the dining room have panoramic views with a decor and layout that emphasises open space and natural light. A large TV screen of up to 80 inches can be mounted for both salon and lounge area. Inside the impressive mast is left exposed as a surprising aesthetic feature in the centre of the space.
To enable the crew to operate the yacht efficiently, access throughout the ONE FIFTY for crew and guests has been carefully both parties separated. Access for guests is aft via large glass doors while the crew enter directly from the hull by a passerelle.
For more information, please contact Ewa Stachurska
PR Sunreef Yachts
ewa@sunreef-yachts.com
www.sunreef-yachts.com
www.sunreef-charter.com
Libellés : Ewa Stachurska, one fifty by sunreef, Sunreef


text:
Elifas heißen im Alten Testament ein Freund des Ijob und ein Sohn des Esau.

Etymologie
Der hebräische Personenname  ist ein Verbalsatzname bestehend aus Subjekt und Prädikat. Das Subjekt und zugleich theophores Element ist אֱל äl "Gott", das Prädikat leitet sich von der im biblischen Hebräisch nicht belegten Verbwurzel פוז puz ab, welche wohl mit dem arabischen fāza "siegen" bedeutungsgleich ist. Der Name bedeutet daher "Gott hat gesiegt". Das Hebräische, wie es in den Personennamen vorliegt, konserviert eine ältere Sprachstufe als das Bibelhebräische. Dies äußert sich darin, dass es sich bei dem -î-, welches an das erste Substantiv angehängt ist, wohl ursprünglich nicht um eine Endung der 1. Person Singular ("mein Gott") handelt, sondern um einen funktionslosen Bindevokal und möglicherweise Überrest einer alten Kasusendung. Dies schließt freilich nicht aus, das der Name zu späterer Zeit als Bekenntnis der Form "Mein Gott ist Sieger / mein Gott siegt" verstanden werden konnte.

Für das Prädikat wird ebenfalls eine Ableitung  von dem Substantiv paz "Feingold" vorgeschlagen und der Name als "Gott ist Feingold" übersetzt. Diese Bedeutung scheint aber nicht sinnvoll zu sein. Gleiches gilt für eine Ableitung von der Wurzel פזז pzz "gelenkig sein" und Übersetzung des Namens als "Gott ist flink".

Die Septuaginta gibt den Namen als Έλιφάς Elifas wieder, die Vulgata mit Eliphaz.

Elifas, Sohn Esaus
 nennt einen Elifas als den Erstgeborenen Esaus. Seine Mutter ist die Kanaanäerin Ada, eine Tochter des Hethiters Elon. Die Söhne des Elifas sind Teman, Omar, Zefo, Gaetam, Kenas und Amalek, seine Tochter heißt Timna (nur in  genannt).

Elifas, der Freund Ijobs

Biblische Erzählung
Elifas ist vor Bildad, Zofar und Elihu der erste der Freunde Ijobs. Er ist folglich der älteste der Freunde. Seine Reden an Ijob umfassen , 15  und 22 .
Elifas wird als Temaniter (Bewohner Temans) bezeichnet. Im Alten Testament bezeichnet Teman entweder eine Landschaft in Edom  oder ganz Edom (z. B. ), abgeleitet von hebr. jāmîn "rechts" kann es aber auch einfach "Süden" bedeuten. Ferner könnte der Name eine Herkunft aus der nordwestarabischen Oasenstadt Tema meinen.

Die Reden des Elifas
Es sind drei Reden des Elifas im Ijobbuch überliefert. Diese sind im Vergleich zu den anderen Freunden Ijobs die umfangreichsten.

Die erste Rede (Kap. 4)
Es handelt sich um eine Mahn- und Trostrede. Sie reagiert auf die Klage Ijobs  und versucht Ijob dazu zu bringen, sich in seinem Leid richtig zu verhalten, indem er seine Klage zurückzieht. Als typischer Vertreter der Weisheit ist Elifas davon überzeugt, dass Gottes Gerechtigkeit sich in Bestrafung des Gottlosen und Bewahrung des Frommen äußert.

Die zweite Rede (Kap. 15)
Es handelt sich um eine Streit- und Lehrrede. Elifas beschreibt das  schreckliche Ergehen der Gottlosen, wodurch er Ijob unterstellt, sein Leiden zeige, dass er zu diesen gehöre. Gerechtigkeit durch Frömmigkeit sei weiterhin möglich, dem Gottlosen drohe die Vernichtung.

Die dritte Rede (Kap. 22)
Es handelt sich um eine zweiteilige Anklage- und Trostrede. Sie übertrifft die vorigen Reden in der Weise, dass Ijob direkte Anklagen gemacht werden, er habe sich sozialer Vergehen schuldig gemacht. Da die dritte Rede des Elifas wesentlich länger als diejenige des Bildad ist, während bei Zofar eine dritte Rede fehlt, wird vermutet, dass die dritte Rede des Elifas als ein Abschluss der Reden der Freunde gilt, indem er als Repräsentant aller Freunde spricht. Die dritte Rede des Bildad wäre dann ein späterer Nachtrag.

Wirkungsgeschichte
In der Septuaginta wird Elifas ebenso wie die anderen Freunde als König bezeichnet. Er wird "König der Thaimaner" genannt. Die Bezeichnung der Freunde als Könige folgte aus einer Gleichsetzung des Ijob mit dem in  genannten edomitischen König Jobab.

Im Testament des Ijob wird Elifas ebenfalls als König bezeichnet. Er ist der Wortführer der Freunde (TestHi 29,3), Verfasser eines königlichen Trauerliedes und singt einen Hymnus auf die Gerechtigkeit Gottes und die Bestrafung Elihus.

Literatur

Art. אֱלִיפַז, In: Gesenius, 18. Aufl. 2013, S. 65.

Person im Buch Genesis
Person im 1. Buch der Chronik
Person im Buch Ijob