LEADER 03679oam 22006374a 450 001 9910480524803321 005 20210104035727.0 010 $a1-4798-0151-8 024 7 $a10.18574/9781479801510 035 $a(CKB)3710000000587503 035 $a(EBL)4045256 035 $a(SSID)ssj0001609173 035 $a(PQKBManifestationID)16319940 035 $a(PQKBTitleCode)TC0001609173 035 $a(PQKBWorkID)14830391 035 $a(PQKB)11273953 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC4045256 035 $a(DE-B1597)548404 035 $a(DE-B1597)9781479801510 035 $a(OCoLC)938018164 035 $a(MdBmJHUP)muse86976 035 $a(EXLCZ)993710000000587503 100 $a20161118d2016 uy 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aur||||||||||| 181 $ctxt 182 $cc 183 $acr 200 00$aCtrl + Z$eThe Right to Be Forgotten /$fMeg Leta Jones 210 1$aLondon :$cNew York University Press,$d2016 210 3$aBaltimore, Md. :$cProject MUSE, $d2021 210 4$dİ2016 215 $a1 online resource (284 p.) 300 $aDescription based upon print version of record. 311 $a1-4798-8170-8 320 $aIncludes bibliographical references and index. 327 $aForgetting made easy -- Forgetting made impossible -- Innovating privacy -- Digital information stewardship -- Ctrl + Z in legal cultures -- Ctrl + Z in the international community 330 $aA gripping insight into the digital debate over data ownership, permanence and policy?This is going on your permanent record!? is a threat that has never held more weight than it does in the Internet Age, when information lasts indefinitely. The ability to make good on that threat is as democratized as posting a Tweet or making blog. Data about us is created, shared, collected, analyzed, and processed at an overwhelming scale. The damage caused can be severe, affecting relationships, employment, academic success, and any number of other opportunities?and it can also be long lasting. One possible solution to this threat? A digital right to be forgotten, which would in turn create a legal duty to delete, hide, or anonymize information at the request of another user. The highly controversial right has been criticized as a repugnant affront to principles of expression and access, as unworkable as a technical measure, and as effective as trying to put the cat back in the bag. Ctrl+Z breaks down the debate and provides guidance for a way forward. It argues that the existing perspectives are too limited, offering easy forgetting or none at all. By looking at new theories of privacy and organizing the many potential applications of the right, law and technology scholar Meg Leta Jones offers a set of nuanced choices. To help us choose, she provides a digital information life cycle, reflects on particular legal cultures, and analyzes international interoperability. In the end, the right to be forgotten can be innovative, liberating, and globally viable. 606 $aRight to be forgotten$2fast$3(OCoLC)fst01923116 606 $aPrivacy, Right of$2fast$3(OCoLC)fst01077444 606 $aPrivacy, Right of 606 $aRight to be forgotten 608 $aElectronic books. 615 0$aRight to be forgotten 615 0$aPrivacy, Right of 615 0$aPrivacy, Right of. 615 0$aRight to be forgotten. 676 $a323.44/8094 700 $aJones$b Meg Leta, $4aut$4http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/aut$01037798 702 $aJones$b Meg Leta 801 0$bMdBmJHUP 801 1$bMdBmJHUP 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910480524803321 996 $aCtrl + Z$92458973 997 $aUNINA