Welcome to Open Science
Contact Us
Home Books Journals Submission Open Science Join Us News
The Right to Be Forgotten Debate: Pros and Cons
Current Issue
Volume 7, 2019
Issue 1 (March)
Pages: 40-43   |   Vol. 7, No. 1, March 2019   |   Follow on         
Paper in PDF Downloads: 136   Since Aug. 22, 2019 Views: 641   Since Aug. 22, 2019
Authors
[1]
Peng Xiao, Foreign Languages School, Zhongnan University of Economics and Law, Wuhan, China.
[2]
Haoran Lin, Law School, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Abstract
Nowadays, a mass of “right to be forgotten” cases are springing up in various countries around the world. On May 25, 2018, the EU General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) came into effect. In the meantime, some countries begin to legislate to protect the right to be forgotten. The growing number of cases and legislative attempts give rise to a heated debate over the establishment of this right. This study aims to summarize main arguments for and against the legalization of this right and provide advice for legislators. The nature of this paper dictates the use of a comparative analysis of opposing arguments about the right to be forgotten. Protagonists of the legalization of the right to be forgotten argue that the forgetting mechanism is crucial to the human society; this right originates in human traditions; the right is a logical extension of traditional rights. Antagonists, however, contend that this right violates the freedom of speech and the freedom of the press; it is also in breach of citizens’ right to know; the exercise of this right faces great difficulties due to technical limitations; it may even engender counterproductive effects. It can be discovered that there is still great controversy over whether the right to be forgotten should be legally protected, hence it would be imprudent for legislators to write this right in law at this stage. It’s recommended that lawmakers from countries where the right to be forgotten hasn’t become lawful should examine the aforementioned arguments one by one by taking the national conditions of their countries into consideration and then decide when the time will be ripe for legislation.
Keywords
Right to Be Forgotten, Pros and Cons Debate
Reference
[1]
Jorge L. Borges (1962). Funes, the Memorious. In A. Kerrigan (Ed.), Ficciones. New York: Grove. P. 32.
[2]
Jorge L. Borges (1962). Funes, the Memorious. In A. Kerrigan (Ed.), Ficciones. New York: Grove. P. 36.
[3]
Viktor Mayer-Schönberger (2009). Delete: The Virtue of Forgetting in the Digital Age. Princeton University Press. P. 115.
[4]
Viktor Mayer-Schönberger (2009). Delete: The Virtue of Forgetting in the Digital Age. Princeton University Press. P. 116.
[5]
Lixin Yang, Xu Han (2015). The Localization and Application of the Right to be Forgotten in China. Journal of Law Application. Vol. 2: p. 24.
[6]
Aidan Kaplan (2018). Criminal Record Expungement and Orders for Limited Access in Pennsylvania. University of Pittsburgh Law Review. Vol. 80: p. 177.
[7]
Alan Westin (1967). Privacy and Freedom. New York: Atheneum. P. 7.
[8]
Liming Wang (2012). Re-definition of Right to Privacy. The Jurist. Vol. 1: p. 108.
[9]
Weili Duan (2016). The Legal Protection of the Right to be Forgotten—and the Right’s Status in Personality Rights. Study & Exploration. Vol. 4: p. 76.
[10]
Xiaodong Ding (2018). The Basic Principle and the Contextualized Definition of “Right to be Forgotten”. Tsinghua University Law Journal. Vol. 12: p. 98.
[11]
Anthony Lewis (2008). Freedom for the Thought That We Hate: A Biography of the First Amendment. New York: Basic Books. P. 1.
[12]
James Q. Whitman (2004). The Two Western Cultures of Privacy: Dignity Versus Liberty. Yale Law Journal. Vol. 113 (6): pp. 1153-1160.
[13]
Jeffrey Rosen (2012). The Right to Be Forgotten. Stanford Law Review Online. Vol. 64: p. 88.
[14]
Steven C. Bennett (2012). The “Right to Be Forgotten”: Reconciling EU and US Perspectives. Berkeley Journal of International Law. Vol. 30 (1): pp. 164-165.
[15]
Rolf H. Weber (2011). The Right to Be Forgotten: More Than a Pandora’s Box? Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and E-Commerce. Vol. 2 (2): p. 122.
[16]
Robert K. Walker (2012). The Right to Be Forgotten. Hastings Law Journal. Vol. 64 (1): p. 257.
[17]
Shouwei Liu (2017). The Status Quo of Traditional Paper Media and Research on its Integration Path. Today’s Massmedia. Vol. 25 (3): p. 82.
[18]
Samuel D. Warren, Louis D. Brandeis (1890). The Right to Privacy. Harvard Law Review. Vol. 4 (5): p. 193.
[19]
David Humphries (2014). U.S. Attitudes Toward the Right to be Forgotten. Software Advice. Available: http://www.softwareadvice.com/security/industryview/right-to-be-forgotten-2014/
[20]
Guangxiu Li, Shuchen Bao (2018). The Counterproductive Effects of “the Streisand Effect” and Choices in Public Relations. New Media Research. Vol. 4 (23): pp. 11-12.
Open Science Scholarly Journals
Open Science is a peer-reviewed platform, the journals of which cover a wide range of academic disciplines and serve the world's research and scholarly communities. Upon acceptance, Open Science Journals will be immediately and permanently free for everyone to read and download.
CONTACT US
Office Address:
228 Park Ave., S#45956, New York, NY 10003
Phone: +(001)(347)535 0661
E-mail:
LET'S GET IN TOUCH
Name
E-mail
Subject
Message
SEND MASSAGE
Copyright © 2013-, Open Science Publishers - All Rights Reserved