Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Critical Views on the Right to Be Forgotten After the Entry Into Force of the GDPR: Is it Able to Effectively Ensure Our Privacy? Cover

Critical Views on the Right to Be Forgotten After the Entry Into Force of the GDPR: Is it Able to Effectively Ensure Our Privacy?

Open Access
|Mar 2022

References

  1. ALESSI, Stefania. Eternal Sunshine: The Right to Be Forgotten in the European Union after the 2016 General Data Protection Regulation. Emory International Law Review, 2017, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 145–171. Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.emory.edu/eilr/vol32/iss1/4.
  2. ANDRAŠKO, Jozef and MESARČÍK, Matúš. Those Who Shall Be Identified: The Data Protection Aspects of the Legal Framework for Electronic Identification in the European Union, TalTech Journal of European Studies, 2021, vol. 11, no. 2, pp.3–24. https://doi.org/10.2478/bjes-2021-0012.10.2478/bjes-2021-0012
  3. AUSLOOS, Jef. The ‘Right to be Forgotten’ – Worth Remembering? Computer Law & Security Review, 2012, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 143–152.10.1016/j.clsr.2012.01.006
  4. BERTRAM, Theo; BURSZTEIN, Elie; CARO, Stephanie et al. Three years of the right to be forgotten, online 2018. Available at: www.elie.net/static/files/three-years-of-the-right-to-be-forgotten/three-years-of-the-right-to-be-forgotten-paper.pdf
  5. BUNN, Anna. The curious case of the right to be forgotten. Computer Law & Security Review, 2015, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 336–350. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S026736491500060610.1016/j.clsr.2015.03.006
  6. CANNATACI, Joseph; ZHAO, Bo et.al. Balancing Privacy and Transparency and Redefining Their New Boundaries in the Internet Ecosystem. UNESCO Internet Study, 2016. Available at: http://www.rug.nl/research/groningen-centre-for-law-and-governance/onderzoekscentra/step-research-group/project-descriptions/unesco-study-privacy-and-transparency
  7. COOK, Lyndsay. The Right to be forgotten: a step in the right direction for cyberspace law and policy. Journal of Law, Technology & the Internet, 2015, vol. 6, pp. 121–132. Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1081&context=jolti
  8. CUNNINGHAM, McKay (2017) Privacy Law That Does Not Protect Privacy, Forgetting the Right to be Forgotten. Buffalo Law Review. 2017, vol. 65, p. 502, 495–546. Available at: http://www.buffalolaw.org/past_issues/65_3/Cunningham.pdf
  9. CURTIS, Sophie and PHILIPSON, Alice. Wikipedia founder: EU’s Right to be Forgotten is ‘deeply immoral, The Telegraph online, 06/08/2014. Available at: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/wikipedia/11015901/EU-ruling-on-link-removal-deeply-immoral-says-Wikipedia-founder.html
  10. De ANDRADE, Norberto. Oblivion: The Right to Be Different from Oneself – Repro-posing the Right to Be Forgotten. IDP. Revista de Internet, Derecho y Política, 2012, no. 13, pp. 122–137. Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2033155
  11. DE HERT, Paul. The Right to Protection of Personal Data. Incapable of Autonomous Standing in the Basic EU Constituting Documents? Utrecht Journal of International and European Law, 2015, vol. 31, no. 80, pp. 1–4, http://doi.org/10.5334/ujiel.cz.10.5334/ujiel.cz
  12. ERDOS, David. The ‘right to be forgotten’ beyond the EU: an analysis of wider G20 regulatory action and potential next steps, Journal of Media Law, 2021, vol. 13, no. 1, p. 5. 1–3510.1080/17577632.2021.1884947
  13. GESENHUES, Amy. The Inevitable Happened: First Company Provides “Right To Be Forgotten” Removal Service, online 2014. Available at: https://searchengineland.com/reputation-vip-online-management-firm-launches-site-assist-googles-forget-form-194998
  14. GLOBOCNIK, Jure. The Right to Be Forgotten is Taking Shape: CJEU Judgments in GC and Others (C-136/17) and Google v CNIL (C-507/17), GRUR International – Journal of European and International IP Law, 2020, vol. 69, no. 4, pp. 380–388. Available at: https://academic.oup.com/grurint/article/69/4/380/573280710.1093/grurint/ikaa002
  15. HOFFMAN, David. Creating an Internet Obscurity Center: Reducing the Burden of Google Spain on Businesses, LawFare online, 2016. Available at: https://www.lawfareblog.com/creating-internet-obscurity-center-reducing-burden-google-spain-businesses
  16. KULK, Stefan; ZUIDERVEEN BORGESIUS, Frederic. Privacy, Freedom of Expression, and the Right to Be Forgotten in Europe. In Selinger, E.; Polonetsky, J. & Tene, O. (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Consumer Privacy, Cambridge University Press, 2018, pp. 301–320. Available at: https://dare.uva.nl/search?identifier=f7d0f415-3404-426a-8833-12861fee7112
  17. LEE, Dave. Google ruling ‘astonishing’, says Wikipedia founder Wales, BBC News, 14/05/2014. Available at: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-27407017
  18. LEE, Edward. The Right to Be Forgotten v. Free Speech. I/S: A Journal Of Law And Policy For The Information Society, 2015, vol. 12, no.1, pp. 85–111. Available at: https://kb.osu.edu/bitstream/handle/1811/80043/ISJLP_V12N1_085.pdf
  19. MARKS, Demi. The Internet Doesn’t Forget: Redefining Privacy Through an American Right to Be Forgotten. UCLA Entertainment Law Review, 2016, vol. 23, pp. 41–64 Available at: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4n00j4j310.5070/LR8231034309
  20. MAYES, Tessa. We have no right to be forgotten online, The Guardian Online, 18/03/2011. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/libertycentral/2011/mar/18/forgotten-online-european-union-law-internet
  21. McGOLDRICK, Dominic. Developments in the Right to be Forgotten, Human Rights Law Review, 2013, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 761–776, https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngt035.10.1093/hrlr/ngt035
  22. MILOSAVLJEVIĆ, Marko; POLER, Melita; ČEFERIN, Rok. In the Name of the Right to be Forgotten: New Legal and Policy Issues and Practices regarding Unpublishing Requests in Slovenian Online News Media, Digital Journalism, 2020, vol. 8, no. 6, 780–796. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2020.174794210.1080/21670811.2020.1747942
  23. PALEIT, Andreas; FONTANELLA-KHAN, James; PICKARD Jim. Google’s removal of BBC article raises censorship fears. CNN Business Online, 03/07/14. Available at: https://edition.cnn.com/2014/07/03/business/ft-google-story-removal/index.html
  24. PAVELEK, Ondřej and ZAJÍČKOVÁ, Drahomíra. Personal Data Protection in the Decision-Making of the CJEU Before and After the Lisbon Treaty. TalTech Journal of European Studies, 2021, vol. 11, no. 2, pp.167–188. https://doi.org/10.2478/bjes-2021-002010.2478/bjes-2021-0020
  25. RAZMETAEVA, Yulia. The Right to Be Forgotten in the European Perspective, TalTech Journal of European Studies, 2020, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 58–76, https://doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2020-000410.1515/bjes-2020-0004
  26. REVENTLOW, Nani Jansen. Can the GDPR and Freedom of Expression Coexist? AJIL Unbound, 2020, vol. 114, pp. 31–34. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/aju.2019.77.10.1017/aju.2019.77
  27. ROSEN, Jeffrey. The right to be forgotten. Stanford Law Review Online, 2012, vol. 64, pp. 88–92. Available at: https://review.law.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2012/02/64-SLRO-88.pdf
  28. ROSEN, Jeffrey. The right to be forgotten. Stanford Law Review Online, 2012, vol. 64, pp. 88–92. Available at: https://review.law.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2012/02/64-SLRO-88.pdf
  29. SCHECHNER, Sam. Google Defends ‘Right to Be Forgotten’ Response. The Wall Street Journal, online 19/11/2014, Available at: https://www.wsj.com/articles/google-defends-right-to-be-forgotten-response-1416414403
  30. SINGLETON, Shaniqua. Balancing A Right To Be Forgotten With A Right To Freedom Of Expression In The Wake Of Google Spain v. AEPD. The Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law, 2015, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 165–193. Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2256&context=gjicl
  31. WEBER, H. Rolf. The Right to Be Forgotten: More Than a Pandora’s Box? JIPITEC – Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and E-Commerce Law, 2011, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 121–130. Available at: https://www.jipitec.eu/issues/jipitec-2-2-2011/3084
  32. BundesgesetzzumSchutznatürlicherPersonenbei der VerarbeitungpersonenbezogenerDaten (Datenschutzgesetz – DSG) StF: BGBl. I Nr. 165/1999 (NR: GP XX RV 1613 AB 2028 S. 179. BR: 5992 AB 6034 S. 657.) [CELEX-Nr.: 395L0046] Available at: https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/GeltendeFassung.wxe?Abfrage=Bundesnormen&Gesetzesnummer=10001597&FassungVom=2018-05-25
  33. Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communications). Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A32002L0058
  34. Directive 2006/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the retention of data generated or processed in connection with the provision of publicly available electronic communications services or of public communications networks and amending Directive 2002/58/EC. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:105:0054:0063:EN:PDF
  35. Report of Estonian Ombudsman 2019. Available at: https://www.oiguskantsler.ee/ylevaade2019/eraelu-kaitse.
  36. Swedish Personal Data Act (1998:204); issued 29 April 1998. Available at: https://www.wipo.int/edocs/lexdocs/laws/en/se/se097en.pdf
  37. Zákon 18/2018 Z. z. z 29. novembra 2017 o ochrane osobných údajov a o zmene a doplnení niektorých zákonov (§ 78), Available at: https://www.slov-lex.sk/pravne-predpisy/SK/ZZ/2018/18/20180525
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/iclr-2021-0015 | Journal eISSN: 2464-6601 | Journal ISSN: 12138770
Language: English
Page range: 96 - 115
Published on: Mar 29, 2022
Published by: Palacký University Olomouc
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 2 issues per year

© 2022 Hovsep Kocharyan, Lusine Vardanyan, Ondrej Hamuľák, Tanel Kerikmäe, published by Palacký University Olomouc
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.