欧盟之外的“被遗忘权”:对20国集团更广泛监管行动和潜在下一步行动的分析

Q2 Social Sciences Journal of Media Law Pub Date : 2021-01-02 DOI:10.1080/17577632.2021.1884947
D. Erdos
{"title":"欧盟之外的“被遗忘权”:对20国集团更广泛监管行动和潜在下一步行动的分析","authors":"D. Erdos","doi":"10.1080/17577632.2021.1884947","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT It has been increasingly asserted that data protection can and should enable individuals to exert some control at least ex post over online data dissemination. Notwithstanding contrary suggestions, therefore, the ‘right to be forgotten’ is not solely an EU phenomenon. Post-2014 the majority of the eight national Data Protection Authorities (DPAs) s operating in non-EU G20 jurisdictions with established data protection legislation have sought to implement such a right through guidance and, in three cases, also enforcement. These jurisdictions span three regions and encompass jurisdictions such as Australia and Canada with a similar outlook to the EU. In light of the profoundly globalised nature of the internet, greater transnational coordination would be valuable. Whilst the G20 is itself ill-suited to this task, the pan-regional Data Protection Convention framework overseen by the Council of Europe as well as the Global Privacy Assembly could play an important role.","PeriodicalId":37779,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Media Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17577632.2021.1884947","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The ‘right to be forgotten’ beyond the EU: an analysis of wider G20 regulatory action and potential next steps\",\"authors\":\"D. Erdos\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17577632.2021.1884947\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT It has been increasingly asserted that data protection can and should enable individuals to exert some control at least ex post over online data dissemination. Notwithstanding contrary suggestions, therefore, the ‘right to be forgotten’ is not solely an EU phenomenon. Post-2014 the majority of the eight national Data Protection Authorities (DPAs) s operating in non-EU G20 jurisdictions with established data protection legislation have sought to implement such a right through guidance and, in three cases, also enforcement. These jurisdictions span three regions and encompass jurisdictions such as Australia and Canada with a similar outlook to the EU. In light of the profoundly globalised nature of the internet, greater transnational coordination would be valuable. Whilst the G20 is itself ill-suited to this task, the pan-regional Data Protection Convention framework overseen by the Council of Europe as well as the Global Privacy Assembly could play an important role.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37779,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Media Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17577632.2021.1884947\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Media Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17577632.2021.1884947\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Media Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17577632.2021.1884947","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

摘要越来越多的人认为,数据保护可以也应该使个人至少事后对在线数据传播施加一些控制。因此,尽管有相反的建议,“被遗忘权”并不仅仅是欧盟的现象。2014年后,在拥有既定数据保护立法的非欧盟G20管辖区内运作的八个国家数据保护机构中,大多数都试图通过指导和在三种情况下的强制执行来落实这一权利。这些司法管辖区横跨三个地区,包括澳大利亚和加拿大等与欧盟前景相似的司法管辖区。鉴于互联网的深刻全球化性质,加强跨国协调将是有价值的。虽然二十国集团本身不适合这项任务,但由欧洲委员会和全球隐私大会监督的泛区域数据保护公约框架可以发挥重要作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The ‘right to be forgotten’ beyond the EU: an analysis of wider G20 regulatory action and potential next steps
ABSTRACT It has been increasingly asserted that data protection can and should enable individuals to exert some control at least ex post over online data dissemination. Notwithstanding contrary suggestions, therefore, the ‘right to be forgotten’ is not solely an EU phenomenon. Post-2014 the majority of the eight national Data Protection Authorities (DPAs) s operating in non-EU G20 jurisdictions with established data protection legislation have sought to implement such a right through guidance and, in three cases, also enforcement. These jurisdictions span three regions and encompass jurisdictions such as Australia and Canada with a similar outlook to the EU. In light of the profoundly globalised nature of the internet, greater transnational coordination would be valuable. Whilst the G20 is itself ill-suited to this task, the pan-regional Data Protection Convention framework overseen by the Council of Europe as well as the Global Privacy Assembly could play an important role.
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
Journal of Media Law
Journal of Media Law Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: The only platform for focused, rigorous analysis of global developments in media law, this peer-reviewed journal, launched in Summer 2009, is: essential for teaching and research, essential for practice, essential for policy-making. It turns the spotlight on all those aspects of law which impinge on and shape modern media practices - from regulation and ownership, to libel law and constitutional aspects of broadcasting such as free speech and privacy, obscenity laws, copyright, piracy, and other aspects of IT law. The result is the first journal to take a serious view of law through the lens. The first issues feature articles on a wide range of topics such as: Developments in Defamation · Balancing Freedom of Expression and Privacy in the European Court of Human Rights · The Future of Public Television · Cameras in the Courtroom - Media Access to Classified Documents · Advertising Revenue v Editorial Independence · Gordon Ramsay: Obscenity Regulation Pioneer?
期刊最新文献
The Bypass Strategy: platforms, the Online Safety Act and future of online speech Freedom of expression after disinformation: Towards a new paradigm for the right to receive information The Digital Services Act’s red line: what the Commission can and cannot do about disinformation The regulation of disinformation: a critical appraisal The EU policy on disinformation: aims and legal basis
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1