二十国集团法定数据保护框架下的在线“被遗忘权”

IF 2.6 4区 社会学 Q1 LAW
D. Erdos, K. Garstka
{"title":"二十国集团法定数据保护框架下的在线“被遗忘权”","authors":"D. Erdos, K. Garstka","doi":"10.1093/idpl/ipaa012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although it is the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation and the Google Spain judgment which has brought the concept of the ʻright to be forgottenʼ online to the fore, this paper argues that its basic underpinnings are present in the great majority of G20 statutory frameworks. Whilst China, India, Saudi Arabia and the United States remain exceptional cases, fifteen out of nineteen (almost 80%) of G20 countries now have fully-fledged statutory data protection laws. By default, almost all of these laws empower individuals to challenge the continued dissemination of personal data not only when such data may be inaccurate but also on wider legitimacy grounds. Moreover, eleven of these countries have adopted statutory ʻintermediaryʼ shields which could help justify why certain online platforms may be required to respond to well-founded ex post challenges even if they lack most ex ante duties here. Nevertheless, the precise scope of many data protection laws online remains opaque and the relationship between such laws and freedom of expression is often unsatisfactory. Despite this, it is argued that G20 countries and G20 Data Protection Authorities should strive to achieve proportionate and effective reconciliation between online freedom of expression and ex post data protection claims, both through careful application of existing law and ultimately through and under new legislative initiatives.","PeriodicalId":51749,"journal":{"name":"International Data Privacy Law","volume":"154 1","pages":"294-313"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The ‘right to be forgotten’ online within G20 statutory data protection frameworks\",\"authors\":\"D. Erdos, K. Garstka\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/idpl/ipaa012\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Although it is the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation and the Google Spain judgment which has brought the concept of the ʻright to be forgottenʼ online to the fore, this paper argues that its basic underpinnings are present in the great majority of G20 statutory frameworks. Whilst China, India, Saudi Arabia and the United States remain exceptional cases, fifteen out of nineteen (almost 80%) of G20 countries now have fully-fledged statutory data protection laws. By default, almost all of these laws empower individuals to challenge the continued dissemination of personal data not only when such data may be inaccurate but also on wider legitimacy grounds. Moreover, eleven of these countries have adopted statutory ʻintermediaryʼ shields which could help justify why certain online platforms may be required to respond to well-founded ex post challenges even if they lack most ex ante duties here. Nevertheless, the precise scope of many data protection laws online remains opaque and the relationship between such laws and freedom of expression is often unsatisfactory. Despite this, it is argued that G20 countries and G20 Data Protection Authorities should strive to achieve proportionate and effective reconciliation between online freedom of expression and ex post data protection claims, both through careful application of existing law and ultimately through and under new legislative initiatives.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51749,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Data Privacy Law\",\"volume\":\"154 1\",\"pages\":\"294-313\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Data Privacy Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/idpl/ipaa012\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Data Privacy Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/idpl/ipaa012","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尽管是欧盟的《通用数据保护条例》和谷歌西班牙判决将“被遗忘权”的概念推到了网上,但本文认为,其基本基础存在于绝大多数G20法定框架中。虽然中国、印度、沙特阿拉伯和美国仍然是特例,但20国集团的19个国家中有15个(几乎80%)现在已经制定了完全成熟的法定数据保护法。在默认情况下,几乎所有这些法律都赋予个人权力,使其能够挑战个人数据的持续传播,不仅在这些数据可能不准确的情况下,而且在更广泛的合法性基础上。此外,其中11个国家采用了法定的“中介”保护措施,这有助于证明为什么某些在线平台可能需要对有充分根据的事后挑战做出回应,即使它们在这里缺乏大多数事前义务。然而,许多在线数据保护法的确切范围仍然不透明,这些法律与言论自由之间的关系往往令人不满意。尽管如此,有人认为,G20国家和G20数据保护机构应努力实现在线言论自由与事后数据保护索赔之间的相称和有效的和解,无论是通过谨慎适用现有法律,还是最终通过新的立法举措。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The ‘right to be forgotten’ online within G20 statutory data protection frameworks
Although it is the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation and the Google Spain judgment which has brought the concept of the ʻright to be forgottenʼ online to the fore, this paper argues that its basic underpinnings are present in the great majority of G20 statutory frameworks. Whilst China, India, Saudi Arabia and the United States remain exceptional cases, fifteen out of nineteen (almost 80%) of G20 countries now have fully-fledged statutory data protection laws. By default, almost all of these laws empower individuals to challenge the continued dissemination of personal data not only when such data may be inaccurate but also on wider legitimacy grounds. Moreover, eleven of these countries have adopted statutory ʻintermediaryʼ shields which could help justify why certain online platforms may be required to respond to well-founded ex post challenges even if they lack most ex ante duties here. Nevertheless, the precise scope of many data protection laws online remains opaque and the relationship between such laws and freedom of expression is often unsatisfactory. Despite this, it is argued that G20 countries and G20 Data Protection Authorities should strive to achieve proportionate and effective reconciliation between online freedom of expression and ex post data protection claims, both through careful application of existing law and ultimately through and under new legislative initiatives.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
9.50%
发文量
20
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信