The Right to Be Forgotten: Issuing a Voluntary Recall

dc.contributor.authorWright, R. George
dc.date.accessioned2018-05-31T17:42:58Z
dc.date.available2018-05-31T17:42:58Z
dc.date.issued2014
dc.description.abstractRecently, in Europe and elsewhere, some form of a “Right to Be Forgotten” in various internet and search engine contexts has been recognized. This Article contends, however, that for various largely practical reasons, no such broad-sweeping right should be adopted in the United States. More narrowly particularized defamation, privacy, confidentiality, and emotional distress claims, along with criminal record expungement statutes, jointly provide a better alternative path, especially when modified to address significant socio-economic class effects. Crucially, the superiority of narrower, particularized, contextual, and pluralistic approaches to the concerns underlying a “Right to Be Forgotten” flows from important systematic biases and asymmetries between persons seeking a de-linking or deletion of personal information on the one hand, and information aggregators such as Google on the other.en_US
dc.identifier.citationR. George Wright, The Right to Be Forgotten: Issuing a Voluntary Recall, 7 Drexel Law Review 401 (2014).en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.2139/ssrn.2569237
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1805/16319
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.subjectprivacyen_US
dc.subjectinformationen_US
dc.subjectright to be forgottenen_US
dc.titleThe Right to Be Forgotten: Issuing a Voluntary Recallen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
Wright_2014_right.pdf
Size:
281.06 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.99 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: