Italian Supreme Court: News "expires", online archives would need to be deleted
Counter View.  I don&#x27;t expect this to sit well with HN.  Is everything to be a sentence for life?  I, and the law in many places, don&#x27;t think that&#x27;s fair.<p>Whilst I don&#x27;t think 2.5 yrs is the right balance, I do think much reporting should expire to an archive.  If a restaurant did something wrong 10 years ago, but clean since (that&#x27;s in the context of the UK with regular, visible, standards checks), who cares about the old offence?  If they&#x27;re still doing wrong they would probably have other, non-expired, offences in the last 10 years.<p>Here in Europe we have the concept of rehabilitation of offenders.  Whilst the UK has a poor reputation for reform (we go for a more US lock &#x27;em up approach), and Gove leaving Justice looks to have put paid to reform for another decade, we have the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act since early 70s.  After a varying period past record is considered spent - 2 yrs prison or more is never spent, the rest expire after a period depending on sentence.  Fines expire after 7 years I think.<p>So the stupidity your child gets into at 18, whilst out drinking, doesn&#x27;t pop up in searches when 30 and applying for jobs.  Legally you don&#x27;t need to mention it again apart from some exceptions like applying to be a judge or joining police.<p>The internet is starting to make a mockery of that reasonable intent.  The law thinks you can become clean, you have been legally for 15 years, but your potential employer finds a BBC page from 1998, and decides to not extend the offer.  That&#x27;s not reasonable either.<p>Perhaps news should archive in step with laws such as that.  Trivia and public order offences expire quickly, 10 year sentences never.  Somehow make it a bit less available behind a paywall, or some credentials. I&#x27;m talking of <i>intent</i> not practicality.  I realise a mirror elsewhere would render that void.<p>In the 80s and 90s it was only the exceptional who got background searches.  Manually by searching through archives.  Reporters would dig into some suspect politician only when it was something major.  That&#x27;s <i>also</i> the wrong balance and meant many things that should have been known in the public interest didn&#x27;t come to light simply because it was difficult to check.