Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This article provides an overview of the right to erasure, or the right to be forgotten, in the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and how it is likely to impact on children. It contrasts the position of Australian children and their European counterparts. The article considers the benefits for children of a right to erasure, as well as some of its limitations, and recommends that Australia should introduce such a right.

Keywords

children data General Data Protection Regulation right to be forgotten right to erasure

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Advocate-General Jääskinen (AG Jääskinen) (2013) Google Spain SL, Google Inc. v Agencia Española de Protección de Datos (AEPD), Mario Costeja González (Case C-131/12, 25 June 2013), Opinion of AG Jääskinen.

Alston

(1994) The best interests principle: towards a reconciliation of culture and human rights. International Journal of Law and the Family 8(1): 1–25.

Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) (2008) For your information: Australian privacy law and practice (vol. 3). Report No 108, 12 August. Sydney, NSW, Australia: Australian Law Reform Commission, Australian Government.

Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) (2013) Serious invasions of privacy in the digital era. Issues Paper 43, 26 September. Sydney, NSW, Australia: Australian Law Reform Commission, Australian Government.

Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) (2014a) Serious invasions of privacy in the digital era. Discussion Paper 80, March. Sydney, NSW, Australia: Australian Law Reform Commission, Australian Government.

Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) (2014b) Serious invasions of privacy in the digital era. Final Report 123, 30 June. Sydney, NSW, Australia: Australian Law Reform Commission, Australian Government.

Bayliss-McCullough

(2014) Does Australia need a ‘right to be forgotten’. Communications Law Bulletin 33(1): 7–11.

BBC (2017) UK data protection laws to be overhauled. BBC News, 7 August. Available at: www.bbc.com/news/technology-40826062 (accessed 16 March 2018).

Bertram

Bursztein

Caro

, et al. (2018) Three years of the right to be forgotten. 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 (accessed 12 April, 2018).

10.

Brock

(2016) How ‘right to be forgotten’ puts privacy and free speech on a collision course. The Conversation, 18 November. Available at: www.theconversation.com/how-right-to-be-forgotten-puts-privacy-and-free-speech-on-a-collision-course-68997 (accessed 12 April 2018).

11.

Bunn

(2015) The curious case of the right to be forgotten. Computer Law & Security Review 31: 336–350.

12.

Coleman

Pothong

Vallejos

, et al. (2017) The Internet on our own terms: how children and young people deliberated about their digital rights. Report, January. Available at: https://casma.wp.horizon.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Internet-On-Our-Own-Terms.pdf (accessed 16 March 2018).

13.

Committee on the Rights of the Child (2003) General comment No 4: adolescent health and development in the context of the convention on the rights of the child. 33rd session, UN Doc CRC/GC/2003/4 (1 July). Available at: https://www.refworld.org/docid/4538834f0.html (accessed 24 April 2019).

14.

Douglas

(2015) Questioning the right to be forgotten. Alternative Law Journal 40(2): 109–112.

15.

Douglas

(2016) Google expands the ‘right to be forgotten’, but Australia doesn’t need it. The Conversation, 7 March. Available at: www.theconversation.com/google-expands-the-right-to-be-forgotten-but-australia-doesnt-need-it-54887 (accessed 12 April 2018).

16.

Erikson

(1968) Identity: Youth and Crisis. London: Faber & Faber.

17.

EUGDPR (n.d.) EUGDPR.org. Available at: www.eugdpr.org (accessed 12 April 2018).

18.

Fazlioglu

(2013) Forget me not: the clash of the right to be forgotten and freedom of expression on the internet. International Data Privacy Law 3(3): 149–157.

19.

Frantziou

(2014) Further developments in the right to be forgotten: the European Court of Justice’s judgment in case C-131/12, Google Spain, SL, Google Inc v Espania Agencia Espanola de Proteccion de Datos. Human Rights Law Review 14: 761–777.

20.

Hanway

(2017) Enterprise security. In: Gemalto Blog. Available at: https://www.gemalto.com/enterprise-security (accessed 10 April 2018).

21.

Harter

Whitesell

(2003) Beyond the debate: why some adolescents report stable self-worth over time and situation, whereas others report changes in self-worth. Journal of Personality 71(6): 1027–1058.

22.

Hodgkin

Newell

(2007) Implementation Handbook for the Convention on the Rights of the Child, 3rd edn. Geneva: United Nations Children’s Fund.

23.

Hunt

(2018) Strengthening privacy protections for my health record. Available at: www.health.gov.au/internet/ministers/publishing.nsf/Content/health-mediarel-yr2018-hunt100.htm (accessed 31 July 2018).

24.

Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) (2017) Consultation: children and the GDPR guidance. Available at: https://ico.org.uk/media/about-the-ico/consultations/2172913/children-and-the-gdpr-consultation-guidance-20171221.pdf (accessed 12 April 2018).

25.

Kroger

(2004) Identity in Adolescence. Hoboken, HJ: Taylor and Francis.

26.

La Quadraturedu Net and Reporters without Borders (2014) Recommendations on the right to be forgotten, 26 September. Available at: https://rsf.org/sites/default/files/recommendations_on_the_right_to_be_forgotten.pdf (viewed 12 April 2018).

27.

La Rue

(2014) Report of the special rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression (Focussing on the right of the child to freedom of expression). Report UN Doc A/69/335, 21 August. Geneva: UN Human Rights Council.

28.

Leary

Kowalski

(1990) Impression management: a literature review and two-component model. Psychological Bulletin 107(1): 34–47.

29.

Livingstone

(2016) The GDPR: using evidence to unpack the implications for children online. In: Media Policy Project Blog. Available at: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/mediapolicyproject/2016/12/12/the-gdpr-using-evidence-to-unpack-the-implications-for-children-online/ (accessed 12 April 2018).

30.

Livingstone

(2017) Children’s privacy rights are prominent in the data protection bill but there’s many a slip. In: Media Policy Project Blog. Available at: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/mediapolicyproject/2017/08/14/childrens-privacy-rights-are-prominent-in-the-data-protection-bill-but-theres-many-a-slip/ (accessed 12 April 2018).

31.

Macenaite

(2017) From universal towards child-specific protection of the right to privacy online: dilemmas in the EU General Data Protection Regulation. New Media & Society 19(5): 765–779.

32.

Mayer-Schönberger

(2014) Omission of search results is not a ‘right to be forgotten’ or the end of Google, The Guardian, 14 May. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/13/omission-of-search-results-no-right-to-be-forgotten (accessed 12 April 2018).

33.

NSW Commission for Children and Young People (2005) Submission to SCAG Discussion Paper, Unauthorised Photographs of the Internet and Ancillary Privacy Issues.

34.

Peter

Valkenberg

(2011) Adolescent’s online privacy: towards a developmental perspective. In: Trepte

Reinecke

(eds) Privacy Online: Perspectives on Privacy and Self-Disclosure in the Social Web. Heidelberg: Springer, p. 221.

35.

Post

(2017–2018) Data privacy and dignitary privacy: Google Spain, the right to be forgotten, and the construction of the public sphere. Duke Law Journal 67: 981–1072.

36.

Richman

Leary

(2009) Reactions to discrimination, stigmatization, ostracism, and other forms of interpersonal rejection: a multi-motive model. Psychological Review 116(2): 365–383.

37.

Rosen

(2011–2012) The deciders: the future of privacy and free speech in the age of Facebook and Google (The Robert L. Levine distinguished lecture). Fordham Law Review 80: 1525–1538.

38.

Rudy

Sheldon

Awong

, et al. (2007) Autonomy, culture and well-being: the benefits of inclusive autonomy. Journal of Research in Personality 4: 983–1007.

39.

Tobin

(2009) Judging the judges: are they adopting the rights approach in matters involving children? Melbourne University Law Review 33: 579–625.

40.

Todd

(2012) Amanda Todd’s story: struggling, bullying, suicide, self harm. Chia Videos, 11 October. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ej7afkypUsc (accessed 9 February 2018).

41.

United Nations Treaty Collection. Chapter IV – human rights: 11. Convention on the rights of the child: status. Available at: http://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-11&chapter=4&lang=en (accessed 25 July 2018).

42.

Van Cleynenbreugel

(2017) What should be forgotten? Time to make sense of Article 17 GDPR from the point of view of data controllers. In: Blog Droit Europeen, Econference on Right to be Forgotten, 25 May. Available at: https://blogdroiteuropeen.com/2017/05/25/what-should-be-forgotten-time-to-make-sense-of-article-17-gdpr-from-the-point-of-view-of-data-controllers-by-pieter-van-cleynenbreugel/ (accessed 12 April 2018).

43.

Westin

(1967) Privacy and Freedom. London: The Bodley Head.

Children and the ‘Right to be Forgotten’: what the right to erasure means for European children,and why Australian children should be afforded a similar right

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References