Ctrl + Z by Meg Leta Jones

Author:Meg Leta Jones
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: LAW104000 Law / Computer & Internet
Publisher: NYU Press

In order to establish a right to be forgotten within false-light claims and to utilize retraction laws, U.S. law would still need to change to treat old information that is not marked as such as a misrepresentation of an individual. False light would need to experience a resurgence within state legal systems. And retraction laws would need to alter the time element, requiring time to have passed, and to be extended beyond traditional media sources like newspapers and radio broadcasts.29 Adding information, especially as limited an addition as a time stamp, may not be sufficient relief from accountability to fall in line with other forms of U.S. forgiveness laws.

If the U.S. wanted to limit the discoverability of content through search engines, it would need an approach different than that of the EU. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act would need to be overhauled in order to limit access to old content through the search engine directly. The U.S. is incredibly unlikely to require intermediaries to obstruct discoverability of personal information upon request when certain conditions are met, like the CJEU has recently required. Such a request could incorporate each of the aforementioned forgiveness law elements and serve as a means for the law to encourage the informal resolution of privacy disputes, but as discussed in chapter 3, this type of informality is not appropriate for a right that has yet to develop contours and certainly not in the U.S., where it directly impacts access to information. A takedown system inspired by the DMCA takedown-notice regime is also unsuitable for U.S. forgiveness, because it does not provide appropriate oversight.

Instead, the source of the information could prevent the indexing of the URL at issue. Going directly to the source is important because the source is in the best position to argue the state of the content in the information life cycle and associated interests. If a claim for digital oblivion were to be made against the source, information stewardship in the U.S. would likely prevent deleting the content, but obscuring the content from search-engine crawlers is possible. This scheme is particularly plausible, given that it has been voluntarily implemented by certain sites. For instance, Public.Resource.org, a site that publishes court records, also evaluates requests to remove these records from search-engine results.30 If Public.Resource.org finds limited access appropriate, it uses a robots.txt file31 to prevent the content stored on its server from being published in search-engine results, in order to protect the privacy of the requester. Ethical crawlers that build the index of search-engine page results will not crawl pages specified by the site in the robots.txt file.32 The documents still exist on Public.Resource.org’s server, and a researcher or journalist looking for court records can find them by going directly to the URL http://bulk.resource.org/robots.txt. All of the URLs of the search-engine-blocked cases are listed and can be easily accessed. But the documents will not be retrieved by a search-engine search for information on a certain person. Discoverability is obstructed at the source

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.