Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Privacy The Internet Your Rights Online

EU Commission Says People Have a 'Right To Be Forgotten' Online 200

nk497 writes "The European Commission wants to strengthen data protection rules to give more power to consumers — including the right to be forgotten online. Legislation it's looking to push through next year will let consumers know when and how their data is being used, and force companies to delete it when asked. 'People should be able to give their informed consent to the processing of their personal data,' the commission said in a statement. 'They should have the "right to be forgotten" when their data is no longer needed or they want their data to be deleted.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

EU Commission Says People Have a 'Right To Be Forgotten' Online

Comments Filter:
  • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) on Friday November 05, 2010 @08:04AM (#34134342) Homepage Journal

    I can delete my Facebook account but I can't delete the photos someone else took with me in them.

  • Amazing, and ironic (Score:5, Interesting)

    by siddesu ( 698447 ) on Friday November 05, 2010 @08:05AM (#34134352)

    Is this the same European Commission that decided some time ago to force data and voice service providers to keep phone and email records for years?

    Will these data be subject to the "right to be forgotten", or government-retained stuff will be magically excepted?

    Consistency, thy name is Europe.

  • by captainpanic ( 1173915 ) on Friday November 05, 2010 @08:17AM (#34134412)

    I can delete my Facebook account but I can't delete the photos someone else took with me in them.

    All data on Facebook is property of Facebook, not of the people who put it there... so you should be able to ask Facebook to remove it... (according to the text, "companies (i.e. Facebook) will be forced to delete it when asked").

  • by schmidt349 ( 690948 ) on Friday November 05, 2010 @08:35AM (#34134504)

    You know, given the choice between my retained personal information being used to (a) sell me pizza or (b) imprison me for expressing an unpopular political viewpoint, I think (b) is a way bigger deal than (a). And given Europe's track record on (b) (hint: 1936-1945 in one bit, and 1917-1991 in another), I'm going to have to say that the Eurofascists scare me a lot more than social media does.

  • by guanxi ( 216397 ) on Friday November 05, 2010 @08:48AM (#34134582)

    Another poster compared privacy today and in the pre-Internet world, which got me to thinking: Until now, innovations in information technology have generally reduced privacy by making it easier, by many orders of magnitude, to copy, distribute, and find information. Any info about you that's on the Web, for example, can be immediately distributed across the world, copied by whoever wants it, and found via Google.

    But information technology could also be used to improve our privacy over the pre-Internet world: Encryption, of course, but also anonymization, DRM (for your personal info, such as copy restrictions and expiration dates), and using search engines to automatically find other data, including the pattern recognition engines that can find photos. Some of these could be regulatory requirements (businesses must anonymize personal info as much as possible, must use DRM with copy restrictions and an expiration date, encrypted it, and the business is responsible for monitoring the web for errant copies). Businesses already use these tools to protect their data and online identity; there's no reason private citizens can't use them too.

    In some ways, private citizens could have more control, not less, of their privacy and identity if they use the tools in their favor.

  • Common names (Score:4, Interesting)

    by antifoidulus ( 807088 ) on Friday November 05, 2010 @08:58AM (#34134694) Homepage Journal
    Tip for anyone who will be a parent(cue slashdot sex jokes:P): Pick the absolute most common name for your child. If there is a famous person with your last name, give your child the same first name as the celebrity. If you have a super uncommon last name, use your spouses last name. It's really one of the few ways you can protect your privacy online anymore, ie by making you a needle in a haystack of people with the same name. I know if I have a son I am certainly naming him after an actor that shares the same last name as I do.
  • by commodore64_love ( 1445365 ) on Friday November 05, 2010 @11:01AM (#34136144) Journal

    P.S.

    One way for a lawyer to demonstrate to ignorant juries is to take their photo, add bits-and-pieces to make the jury appear to be smoking dope, and then show the "before" and "after" photos the next day. That would demonstrate "reasonable doubt" that the employee is not guilty, but a victim of a modified image.

"I don't believe in sweeping social change being manifested by one person, unless he has an atomic weapon." -- Howard Chaykin

Working...