The Right to be Forgotten in the Digital Age (original) (raw)
Related papers
The EU rights to privacy and personal data protection: 20 years in 10 questions: Discussion paper
The rights to privacy and to personal data protection, enshrined respectively in Art. 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (EU) (hereafter, the ‘EU Charter’), have been particularly powerful in determining the evolution of EU law and policy over the last years. On their basis, the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) declared invalid the Data Retention Directive, advised against the conclusion of a negotiated agreement on the transfer of Passenger Name Record (PNR) data to Canada, and brought down the major legal instrument allowing for the transfer of personal data to the United States (US). The CJEU has also asserted, on the basis of Art. 7 and 8 EU Charter, the existence of rights in the hands of individuals in relation to data about them processed by search engines. Judgments such as Digital Rights, Schrems and Google Spain8, but also the Court’s Opinion 1/15 on the PNR agreement between the EU and Canada, have demonstrated the importance of these two fundamental rights for EU law, also against the background of a continuously developing data- driven information society built on the massive of use of personal data.
Regulation (EU) no 2016/679 (hereinafter 'GDPR'), which will become applicable throughout the EU from next May and will replace Directive 95/46/EC, contains the first legislative embodiment of the right to be forgotten. In other words, the personal right that, thanks also to the well known Google Spain case, has captured the attention of operators and academics alike. However, from a close examination of the new legislation it is arguable that the right to be forgotten could well end up being somewhat diminished once the GDPR takes effect. Indeed, many issues concerning the right in question have not been addressed, despite the fact that both case law and scholars in various Member States have much contributed in this debate recently. This work seeks to analyse the impact that the new legislation will have on the right to be forgotten, in particular having regard to how that right has been conceived in the Italian legal system in light of the Personal Data Protection Code and the most significant case law on the matter. The goal of the research is to demonstrate that even after the entry into force of the GDPR a crucial role in the actual definition of the concept of the right to be forgotten and the mechanics of protecting it will necessarily have to be played by the courts.
Computer Law & Security Review, Volume 29, Issue 3, June 2013, Pages 229–235
The EU Proposal for a General Data Protection Regulation has caused a wide debate between lawyers and legal scholars and many opinions have been voiced on the issue of the right to be forgotten. In order to analyse the relevance of the new rule provided by Article 17 of the Proposal, this paper considers the original idea of the right to be forgotten, pre-existing in both European and U.S. legal frameworks. This article focuses on the new provisions of Article 17 of the EU Proposal for a General Data Protection Regulation and evaluates its effects on court decisions. The author assumes that the new provisions do not seem to represent a revolutionary change to the existing rules with regard to the right granted to the individual, but instead have an impact on the extension of the protection of the information disseminated on-line.
The Right to Be Forgotten: A Controversial Topic Under the General Data Protection Regulation
Legal Science: Functions, Significance and Future in Legal Systems I, 2019
kopsavilkums Jaunais datu aizsardzības regulējums attiecībā uz tiesībām tikt aizmirstam piedāvā indi vīdiem iespēju bez liekas kavēšanās no datu pārziņa panākt no šiem indivīdiem iegūto personas datu dzēšanu. Šīs tiesības izraisījušas debates, kas saistītas ar datu pārziņa veiktas datu apstrādes pārliecinošiem likumīgiem pamatiem, kas būtu primāri pār datu subjekta interesēm, tiesībām un brīvībām, vai pār tiesisku prasījumu pamatošanu, īstenošanu vai aizstāvēšanu. Tātad tiesības tikt aizmirstam tiek piemērotas ar īpašiem izņēmumiem, jo sevišķi gadījumos, kad personas dati saskaņā ar VDAR tiek apstrādāti nelikumīgi. Šī darba mērķis ir analizēt iemeslus, kuru dēļ datu dzēšanas tiesības var tikt atsauktas atbilstoši VDAR 17. panta 3. punktā noteiktajiem ierobežojumiem-priekšnosacījumu kopumam, kas jāizpilda, lai panāktu pagātnē iegūtās informācijas dzēšanu. Tiks analizēta arī Eiropas Kopienu Tiesas (EKT) un Eiropas Cilvēktiesību tiesas (ECT) lēmumu būtī ba, kuru rezultātā izstrādāts kritēriju kopums, lai atrastu saprātīgus risinājumus, panākot līdzsvaru starp šīm tiesībām un vārda un informācijas brīvību, mūsu tiesībām atcerēties un tiesiskās paļāvības nodrošināšanu. Pētījums apliecina nepieciešamību līdzsvarot paaugstinātu kontroli pār indivīdiem un citas pamattiesības saskaņā ar proporcionalitātes principu. atslēgvārdi: VDAR, tiesības tikt aizmirstam, pārbaude, ierobežojumi, ECT, EKT summary The new regulation of data privacy on the right to be forgotten offers the possibility of the individuals to obtain from the data controller the erasure of personal data concerning him or her without undue delay. This right has conceived a debate related to compelling legitimate grounds, of the controller, for the processing which override the interests, rights and freedoms of the data subject or for the establishment, exercise or defense of legal claims. Consequently, the exercise of the right to be forgotten is applied under specific exemptions and especially when personal data is processed unlawfully under the GDPR. The purpose of this paper is to analyse the grounds whereby the right of erasure can be invoked from the perspective of restrictions, established by applying paragraph 3 of Article 17 of the GDPR, as a set of conditions, which has to be fulfilled commutatively, to gain the erasure of past information. The article will also provide the analysis of the essence of the decisions of European Court of Justice (ECJ) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), which has developed a set of criteria to find the reasonable solutions in
Technological and social phenomena like cloud computing, behavioural advertising, online social networks as well as globalisation (of data flows) have profoundly transformed the way in which personal data are processed and used. This paper discusses the efficiency of the legislation in force and the impact of PETs and the concept of privacy by design on the enforcement of data protection rules. By recognizing the need to update the data protection regulation as a result of current technological trends that threaten to erode core principles of data protection, the paper addresses the question if the Draft-Regulation presents an adequate and efficient response to the challenges that technological changes pose to regulators. In this context the paper focuses on the right to be forgotten as a comprehensive set of existing and new rules to better cope with privacy risks online in the age of "perfect remembering" and we how persistency and high availability of information limit the right of individuals to be forgotten. The paper deals with both the normative and the technical instruments and requirements so as to ensure that personal information will not be permanently retained.
Personal Data Protection and the EU's endeavor towards adequate protection
The word "information" has been regarded in many issues, but it fits a specific phenomenon better than any words, and this is the "information society". In this society we live in, interconnectedness gains so many levels through fiber-optic cables, wireless spheres, expanding social media, enlarging investment on software business etc. and innovation happens in a volatile respect. Hence, what we see is an immense flow of data between all kinds of actors, and the total amount of information doubles triples each year, as the number of actors increase day-by-day. Within this realm, the question of "who controls the information?" arises, because we know that ipsa scientia potestas est (knowledge itself is power). Well, the answer is simple: potentially, everyone. Because the progressing technology has vulnerabilities which enable others to breach into your calls, desktop files, social media activities etc. Further, surveillance under the name of "national security" is an essential issue since 9/11, and has become a world-wide trend for every government. Besides, commercial use of data is no secret anymore; Google, Facebook and all other Internet giants use personal data for several reasons, such as personalized advertisement and selling it to third parties. Therefore one may claim that data is the new form of exchange, or is the new currency.