scholarly journals Privacy, Freedom of Expression, and the Right to Be Forgotten in Europe

2018 ◽  
pp. 301-320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Kulk ◽  
Frederik Zuiderveen Borgesius
Keyword(s):  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Right To Be Forgotten ◽  
The Right

The Right To Be Forgotten

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward L. Carter
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Search Engines ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Concept ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Right To Be Forgotten ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

The right to be forgotten is an emerging legal concept allowing individuals control over their online identities by demanding that Internet search engines remove certain results. The right has been supported by the European Court of Justice, some judges in Argentina, and data-protection regulators in several European countries, among others. The right is primarily grounded in notions of privacy and data protection but also relates to intellectual property, reputation, and right of publicity. Scholars and courts cite, as an intellectual if not legal root for the right to be forgotten, the legal principle that convicted criminals whose sentences are completed should not continually be publicly linked with their crimes. Critics contend that the right to be forgotten stands in conflict with freedom of expression and can lead to revisionist history. Scholars and others in the southern cone of South America, in particular, have decried the right to be forgotten because it could allow perpetrators of mass human rights abuses to cover up or obscure their atrocities. On the other hand, those in favor of the right to be forgotten say that digital technology preserves memory unnaturally and can impede forgiveness and individual progress. The right to be forgotten debate is far from resolved and poses difficult questions about access to, and control of, large amounts of digital information across national borders. Given the global nature of the Internet and the ubiquity of certain powerful search engines, the questions at issue are universal, but solutions thus far have been piecemeal. Although a 2014 decision by the Court of Justice of the European Union (EU) garnered much attention, the right to be forgotten has been largely shaped by a 1995 European Union Directive on Data Protection. In 2016, the EU adopted a new General Data Protection Regulation that will take effect in 2018 and could have a major impact because it contains an explicit right to be forgotten (also called right to erasure). The new regulation does not focus on the theoretical or philosophical justification for a right to be forgotten, and it appears likely the debate over the right in the EU and beyond will not be resolved even when the new rule takes effect.

The “Right to be Forgotten” in the Era of Social Media and Cloud Computing

2014 ◽  
pp. 1975-1989
Author(s):  
Maria Giannakaki
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Cloud Computing ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Personal Information ◽  
New Right ◽  
Web 3.0 ◽  
Right To Be Forgotten ◽  
Data Protection Directive ◽  
The Right ◽  
Proper Balance

The globalization and ubiquitous character of information in the era of social media and cloud computing has led to a loss of control over individuals' own data, who face significant difficulties to understand and measure the consequences of the disclosure of their personal information on the Internet, as well as the means and the context in which they are or will be processed. Under the reviewing process of the EU Data Protection Directive, the “right to be forgotten” appears to be the means by which individuals will be able to regain control over their data. However, implementing the new right in the ICT environment and striking the proper balance between conflicting rights, such as the freedom of expression, will not be easy. The purpose of the chapter is to identify the challenges that Web 2.0, Web 3.0, and cloud computing technologies raise, focusing on how these challenges are addressed under the new “right to be forgotten” and providing an insight of the alternative “quasi legal” measures that emerge.

Legal Protection of the Right to be Forgotten on the Internet in European and Arab Legislation

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Jamal Barafi ◽  
Ali Hadi Al-Obeidi
Keyword(s):  
Mass Media ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Access To Information ◽  
Right To Privacy ◽  
European Approach ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
Right To Be Forgotten ◽  
The Right

Abstract The development of the Internet and mass media has facilitated access to information and freedom of expression in unprecedented ways, but in so doing there have been many violations, especially of the right to privacy. Such violations have led to calls for the establishment of the right to be forgotten. In this paper, we focus on clarifying the concept of the right to be forgotten and the conditions for establishing this. Moreover, we consider the European approach to the right to be forgotten (RTBF), showing how different European instruments have been employed to recognize this right, such as recommendations, regulations, and directives, in order to coordinate national efforts on this issue. In addition, this paper will analyze the stance of some national Arabic legislation regarding the RTBF.

scholarly journals Right to be forgotten: european data imperialism, national privilege, or universal human right?

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 125-152
Author(s):  
Oskar J. Gstrein
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Data ◽  
Right To Be Forgotten ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right

The Digital Age has fundamentally reshaped the preconditions for privacy and freedom of expression. This transpires in the debate about a "right to be forgotten". While the 2014 decision of the European Court of Justice in "Google Spain" touches upon the underlying issue of how increasing amounts of personal data affects individuals over time, the topic has also become one of the salient problems of Internet Governance. On 24th September 2019 the European Court of Justice delivered its judgment in "Google vs CNIL" (C-507/17) which was supposed to clarify the territorial scope of the right. However, this judgment has raised doubts about the enforceability of the General Data Protection Regulation, and reveals the complex, multi-layered governance structure of the European Union. Acknowledging such complexity at a substantive and institutional level, this article starts by analysing the judgment. Additionally, to better understand the current situation in the European Union and its member states, recently produced draft guidelines by the European Data Protection Board are presented and discussed, as well as two judgments of the German Federal Constitutional Court. Subsequently, the European developments are put in international context. Finally, the insights from these sections are combined which allows to develop several conceptual ideas. In conclusion, it is argued that the right to be forgotten remains complex and evolving. Its success depends on effective multi-layer and multistakeholder interaction. In this sense, it has become a prominent study object that reveals potential venues and pitfalls on a path towards more sophisticated data protection frameworks.

The “Right to be Forgotten” in the Era of Social Media and Cloud Computing

2012 ◽  
pp. 10-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Giannakaki
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Cloud Computing ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Personal Information ◽  
New Right ◽  
Web 3.0 ◽  
Right To Be Forgotten ◽  
Data Protection Directive ◽  
The Right ◽  
Proper Balance

The globalization and ubiquitous character of information in the era of social media and cloud computing has led to a loss of control over individuals’ own data, who face significant difficulties to understand and measure the consequences of the disclosure of their personal information on the Internet, as well as the means and the context in which they are or will be processed. Under the reviewing process of the EU Data Protection Directive, the “right to be forgotten” appears to be the means by which individuals will be able to regain control over their data. However, implementing the new right in the ICT environment and striking the proper balance between conflicting rights, such as the freedom of expression, will not be easy. The purpose of the chapter is to identify the challenges that Web 2.0, Web 3.0, and cloud computing technologies raise, focusing on how these challenges are addressed under the new “right to be forgotten” and providing an insight of the alternative “quasi legal” measures that emerge.

scholarly journals Approach towards the right to be forgotten under Turkish law in comparison with EU and US laws: a need for a reform?

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (11) ◽  
Author(s):  
CANYAŞ Oytun ◽  
CANYAŞ AslıBAYATA
Keyword(s):  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Comparative Law ◽  
Press Freedom ◽  
Digital Archive ◽  
Fresh Start ◽  
Personality Rights ◽  
Right To Be Forgotten ◽  
Eu And Us ◽  
The Right ◽  
Court Practice

This study firstly analyses the general approaches of EU and US laws to the right to be forgotten. Then, basing on the right to be forgotten, a variety of dimensions from comparative law, court practice, doctrinal views and different legal sub-branches are considered from the aspect of Turkish law. Although there is no specific provision on the right to be forgotten in Turkish law, the right has been subject to doctrinal discussions from different perspectives. It is also referred to in court judgments, specifically when an individual wishes to erase certain news, data, etc. from the digital and/or non-digital archive so they can make a fresh start to a new life. Granting that person the right to be forgotten is in terms of protecting personality rights and privacy while acknowledging that these interests may compete with rights to press freedom and freedom of expression. After scrutinising the doctrinal view and court judgments, this study concludes that considering Turkish law, certain provisions should be enacted on the right to be forgotten to ensure uniform interpretation and clarify the definition and conditions of application.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document