Protecting post-mortem privacy: reconsidering the privacy interests of the deceased in a digital world

Lilian Edwards, Edina Harbinja

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

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.
LanguageEnglish
Pages101-147
Number of pages47
Journal Cardozo Arts and Entertainment Law Journal
Volume32
Issue number1
Early online date17 Nov 2013
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Fingerprint

privacy
Law
common law
personality
counseling psychology
death
personal data
search engine
reputation
integrity
anthropology
assets
legislation
manager
art
regulation
human being
market

Keywords

  • personality rights
  • privacy law
  • rights of the deceased

Cite this

@article{5345e769a09341458ac749e628f41261,
title = "Protecting post-mortem privacy: reconsidering the privacy interests of the deceased in a digital world",
abstract = "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.",
keywords = "personality rights, privacy law, rights of the deceased",
author = "Lilian Edwards and Edina Harbinja",
year = "2013",
language = "English",
volume = "32",
pages = "101--147",
journal = "Cardozo Arts and Entertainment Law Journal",
issn = "0736-7694",
number = "1",

}

Protecting post-mortem privacy : reconsidering the privacy interests of the deceased in a digital world. / Edwards, Lilian; Harbinja, Edina.

In: Cardozo Arts and Entertainment Law Journal , Vol. 32, No. 1, 2013, p. 101-147.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Protecting post-mortem privacy

T2 - Cardozo Arts and Entertainment Law Journal

AU - Edwards, Lilian

AU - Harbinja, Edina

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - personality rights

KW - privacy law

KW - rights of the deceased

UR - http://www.cardozoaelj.com/issues/forthcoming/edwards-galleyed-good/

UR - http://ssrn.com/abstract=2267388

M3 - Article

VL - 32

SP - 101

EP - 147

JO - Cardozo Arts and Entertainment Law Journal

JF - Cardozo Arts and Entertainment Law Journal

SN - 0736-7694

IS - 1

ER -