Protecting Post-Mortem Privacy: Reconsidering the Privacy Interests of the Deceased in a Digital World
Protecting Post-Mortem Privacy: Reconsidering the Privacy Interests of the Deceased in a Digital World
复制标题
保护死后隐私：重新考虑数字世界中死者的隐私利益
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2013
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Edina Harbinja
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
L. Edwards;Edina Harbinja
在一般继承法中，甚至在隐私文学中，死后隐私都不是一个公认的艺术术语或制度类别。它可以被称为一个人有权保存和控制他或她死后的名誉、尊严、正直、秘密或记忆。虽然这一概念在心理学、咨询和人类学等学科中得到了普遍关注，但到目前为止，这一概念在法律中，特别是在普通法中，相对较少受到关注。我们认为，数字世界的新环境，特别是在Web2.0中介平台上创建、托管和共享的一系列新的、大量的“数字资产”的出现，往往会泄露高度个人或隐私的个人数据，需要重新审视这一立场。对英美法系和大陆法系的比较制度进行了分析，重点是人格权、诽谤、精神权利和作证自由，结果证实，普通法对死后隐私的支持很少，虽然人格权通常在民法中有更大的吸引力，包括他们死后的生存，但合同监管所发挥的主要作用可能仍然意味着，无论总部设在哪里，美国中介平台的用户都被剥夺了死后隐私权。在建立了在线法律隐私保护的关键空白之后，我们建议未来的保护可能需要来自立法、合同或“代码”解决方案，其中第一个进入市场的是Google Inactive Account Manager。
Post-mortem privacy is not a recognised term of art or institutional category in general succession law or even privacy literature. It may be termed the right of a person to preserve and control what becomes of his or her reputation, dignity, integrity, secrets or memory after their death. While of established concern in disciplines such as psychology, counselling and anthropology, this notion has till now has received relatively little attention in law, especially common law. We argue that the new circumstances of the digital world, and in particular the emergence of a new and voluminous array of “digital assets” created, hosted and shared on web 2.0 intermediary platforms, and often revealing highly personal or intimate personal data, require a revisiting of this stance. An analysis of comparative common and civilian law institutions, focusing on personality rights, defamation, moral rights and freedom of testation, confirms that there is little support for post-mortem privacy in common law, and while personality rights in general have greater traction in civilian law, including their survival after death, the primary role taken by contract regulation may still mean that users of US-based intermediary platforms, wherever they are based, are deprived of post mortem privacy rights. Having establshed a crucial gap in online legal privacy protection, we suggest future protection may need to come from legislation, contract or “code” solutions, of which the first emergent into the market is Google Inactive Account Manager.