The Right to Be Forgotten Across the Pond

Jones, Meg Leta; Ausloos, Jef

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2032325

Cited by 13 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is in accordance to the "EU:Right to erasure" legislation [8]. Unless explicit permission has been given by the user to allow the retention of data they have already shared with other users.…”

Section: Service Requirementsmentioning

confidence: 57%

A Provenance-Based Policy Control Framework for Cloud Services

Ali¹,

Moreau

2015

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In the context of software, provenance holds the key to retaining a mirror instance of the lifespan of a service, which can be replayed/reproduced from the beginning. This entails the nature of invocations that took place, how/where the data were created, modified, updated and the user's engagement with the service. With such an encyclopedia of information, it opens up a diversity of value-added features (compliance control, accountability) that can improve the usability of a service.In this paper, we extend our previous work on the provenance-based policy language (cProvl) and model (cProv) by proposing a preliminary policy control framework. The framework provides the necessary building blocks for integrating and developing services that are able to generate and use provenance data for provenance-based compliance control, which runs on a XACML engine. We demonstrate the capability of the framework by applying it to a service case, and conduct benchmarks to determine its scalability and performance.

show abstract

Section: Service Requirementsmentioning

confidence: 57%

A Provenance-Based Policy Control Framework for Cloud Services

Ali¹,

Moreau

2015

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most scholarship on the right to be forgotten, including that which has been produced beyond U.S. borders, has focused on the legal practicalities of such a right (Ambrose & Ausloos, 2013;Bennett, Parsons, & Molnar 2014;Koops, 2011;Rustad & Kulevska, 2014;Tsesis, 2014). In the United States, early scholarship on the right to be forgotten challenged its potential constitutionality in light of the First Amendment (Carbone, 2015;Larson, 2013;McNealy, 2012;Rosen, 2011;Walker, 2012), but other scholarship has looked for ways to consider the right to be forgotten within existing American law and/or to bridge the divide it creates with EU law (Cohen, 2012;Jasanoff, 2016;Jones, 2016;Schwartz, 2013).…”

Section: A Right To Be Forgotten In America: Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Americans Want a Right to be Forgotten? Estimating Public Support for Digital Erasure Legislation

Bode¹,

Jones²

2018

Policy & Internet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With the increasing salience of online privacy as an issue, concern has focused on the ability to delete outdated personal information. In response, several varieties of a law mimicking the European “Right to be Forgotten” have been introduced at the state and federal level in the United States, despite limited measurement of public opinion on the issue. Because policymakers and courts often consider public opinion when deciding what laws to make and how to interpret those laws, public opinion is an important consideration when thinking about the potential for a right to be forgotten in the United States. In order to determine likely levels of support, as well as what predicts public backing of such a law, we analyze survey data collected from Amazon's Mechanical Turk (N = 1,380). We find that women are more likely to support such a law, as are those who are particularly concerned about online privacy, and those who express greatest confidence in Google. Those who think the government is too large are less likely to support such legislation. This suggests a complicated road forward for a Right to be Forgotten in the United States, with coalitions of support crossing traditional political boundaries.

show abstract

“…Here, US and EU perspectives have differed greatly. The US has voiced concerns over stifling free speech and creating censorship, whilst the EU has highlighted the importance of privacy rights [1,5]. For example, the recent European Court of Justice Google Spain Case [31] discussed balancing privacy interests of one individual against freedom of expression.…”

Section: Legal Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

Playing the Legal Card

Luger

Urquhart

Rodden

et al. 2015

Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The regulatory climate is in a process of change. Design, having been implicated for some time, is now explicitly linked to law. This paper recognises the heightened role of designers in the regulation of ambient interactive technologies. Taking account of incumbent legal requirements is difficult. Legal rules are convoluted, uncertain, and not geared towards operationalisable heuristics or development guidelines for system designers. Privacy and data protection are a particular moral, social and legal concern for technologies. This paper seeks to understand how to make emerging European data protection regulations more accessible to our community. Our approach develops and tests a series of data protection ideation cards with teams of designers. We find that, whilst wishing to protect users, regulation is viewed as a compliance issue. Subsequently we argue for the use of instruments, such as our cards, as a means to engage designers in leading a human-centered approach to regulation.

show abstract

The Right to Be Forgotten Across the Pond

Cited by 13 publications

References 11 publications

A Provenance-Based Policy Control Framework for Cloud Services

A Provenance-Based Policy Control Framework for Cloud Services

Do Americans Want a Right to be Forgotten? Estimating Public Support for Digital Erasure Legislation

Playing the Legal Card

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About