According to Wikipedia, the right to be forgotten is a concept that has been discussed and put into practice in the European Union (EU) and in Argentina since 2006. The issue has arisen from the desires of some individuals to "determine the development of his 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 considerable controversy about the practicality of establishing a right to be forgotten to the status of an international human right in respect to access to information, due in part to the vagueness of current rulings attempting to implement such a right.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 a rewriting of history,and opposing concerns about problems such as revenge porn sites appearing in Google search listings for a person's name, or references to petty crimes committed many years ago indefinitely remaining an unduly prominent part of a person's Google footprint.
What do you think about that? Please, share your thoughts and tell us about expericiences in your country.
Dear Jesus,
Dear All,
This is – as mentioned – a controversial issue. One can ask the question: what is more important the right to defend ourselves and our children or mostly hidden information should be perfectly sheltered. I think humanity is going on a way where discharge is provided in advance even for the most terrible sins.
The current debate over the right to be forgotten, spurred by a European Union lately. I agree with Jesus that there are concerns about its impact on the right to freedom of expression, its interaction with the right to privacy.
Whatever decision is made on the side of the law has to take into account:
* The right to a persons privacy vs freedom of speech as Jesus so rightly puts it.
* Whether it is a normal person or a convicted felon
* Whether it imposes undue burden to companies that store information to target specific documents and redact them
* Whether the person has the right to call for the right to be forgotten based on the events that transpire (can the events be considered a matter of law such as evidence? does it impact such amount of people that it is difficult to invoke such right?).
*Is the person considered a public figure?
*Is the person documenting the event a reporter(are bloggers reporters)?
These are really complex issues for which I think that a one size fit all ruling may not even be possible. The alternative that I see is that each each particular should be treated on a case by case basis.
I think that humans have the right to have a new life and they can do it without been forgotten.
The right to be forgotten contradicts the laws of human rights.
I personally think that the right to be forgotten should be implemented. The reason for this is that personally I did expert witness testimony on various cases including those in which people were murdered. What if the conviction went X way and the convicted felon did not get prison time and did not like the findings that I got from the evidence. Then, somebody got hold of my address and published it on the Internet. At this point in time my family is in danger. I personally do not want this to happen
Dear All,
I think it is important to determine what deeds can be forgotten and forgiven.
I agree for the right to handle our digital signatures, provided that we are not Governors, Prime Ministers, Presidents and other powerful officials.
Highly interesting question! It directly is concerned with ethics, forgiveness and new chances for an earlier mistake. Yes we have the right, that our faults are forgotten, but not we as human beeings. We have the right to be perceived and accepted even if we are weak and faulty sometimes.
This is the ruling that Europe’s highest court, the European Court of Justice, approved this week. Much of the case turns on technical issues, such as whether a search engine is a “processor” of personal data under the law (it is). The bottom line, however, is that Google must remove links to Web pages that contain personal information unless the public’s interest in access to the information in question outweighs the privacy interests of the person who is affected
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/view_from_chicago/2014/05/the_european_right_to_be_forgotten_is_just_what_the_internet_needs.html
I am with Abedallah! I add that sometimes the social conditions push citizens to do unlawful actions. So instead of "forgotten" it could be more important to correct the social conditions.
The "Right to Be Forgotten" seems misnamed and ambiguous. Respondents in this thread show the confusion inherent to the term. You would think that it means the right to be obliterated in the memory of the world community for one´s own misdeeds. But it doesn´t have that existential meaning. Instead, according to Krishnan´s article, it means something more limited: the right to control your own reputation online. Therefore it should receive a more precise name, like the right to control online reputation, no?
German poet Rainer Marie Rilke lyricized the right to choose one´s own death. In certain circumstances (e.g., when quality of life is lacking in biological existence), euthanasia seems justified. There seems to be a whole array of rights adhering to the possibility of self-extinction. A monograph could arise defining the parameters of those rights.
Rembrandt "The return of the prodigal son", 1669. "A person, who leaves his parents' home in search of smth new and better, but later returns to what he had left (repentant of what he had done). "He was lost and is found". Being a student I participated in students' voluntary construction gang and communicated with free prisoners there(Baikal-Amur railway). I was shocked by their words, "We are free now, if somebody looks at us with despite- we'll kill". I'm sure- repentance and mercy.
Once a person paid his debt with society he should have the right to be forgotten. As Kamal put it, it can be a problem to all the family, not only to the condenmed.
I think that the problem is the balance between the right to private life, including the data protection rights and the right to be forgotten (in one side); and the freedom of the press (that is very conditioned today by Google). Maybe Google Spain ECJ case may damage in the future the freedom of the press in Europe
A panel of experts appointed by Google to advise it on a European court ruling ordering it to remove some personal information from search results is leaning towards limiting the application to European websites only.The territorial reach of the "right to be forgotten" decision from the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has put the search engine giant at odds with the European Union's data protection watchdogs, who have told it to remove links across all relevant versions of its website, including Google.com.
http://gadgets.ndtv.com/shortlink.aspx?article=657025
فعلا امر مثير للجدل .اعتقد ان حق النسيان من الممكن ان ينطبق على الشعور بالالم وبدء مرحلة جديدة ولكن بالنسبة لمرتكبي الجرائم او القادة الظالمين ...الخ يجب عدم النسيان لان في ذلك ظلم جديد للضحايا
Actually determining the arrival of the right of forgetfulness to be applied to the world's figure and start a new phase but for the perpetrators of the offensive or commanders ... etc. should not forget about because of new peace in the victims
The universe is a perfect accounting system; the 'compuverse' is an imperfect information machine, with many random errors. It is very difficult to practice law enforcement in such a rapidly evolving technical laboratory. Your pointing to computational ethics is, maybe, the best learning startegy to stay in tune with the acceleration of information technology and human privacy. Like money, information does not behave neutral in human exchange processes.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Philosophy
- Ethics