The U.S. Should Adopt the "Right to Be Forgotten" Online : a Debate
(eVideo)

Book Cover
Average Rating
Contributors
Films Media Group, film distributor.
Intelligence² (U.S.), production company.
Status

Description

Loading Description...

Also in this Series

Checking series information...

More Like This

Loading more titles like this title...

More Details

Published
Intelligence2
Format
eVideo
Language
English

Notes

General Note
Streaming video file encoded with permission for digital streaming by Films Media Group on September 09, 2015.
General Note
Title from distributor's description (Films Media Group, October 1 2015).
Restrictions on Access
Access requires authentication through Films on Demand.
Description
In 2014, the European Union's Court of Justice ruled that individuals have a right to be forgotten online, "the right-under certain conditions-to ask search engines to remove links with personal information about them." This right is not absolute, however, but meant to be balanced against other fundamental rights, like freedom of expression. In the six months following the court's decision, Google received more than 180,000 removal requests. Of those reviewed and processed, 41% were granted. Largely seen as a victory by Europeans, the reaction among Americans was overwhelmingly negative. Was the Court of Justice's ruling a win for privacy and human dignity, or a blow to free speech and public information? Should the United States adopt the "right to be forgotten" online?
Target Audience
9 & up.
Language
Closed-captioned.
Local note
InfoBase Learning,Films on Demand: Master Academic Collection - US

Citations

APA Citation, 7th Edition (style guide)

The U.S. Should Adopt the "Right to Be Forgotten" Online: a Debate .

Chicago / Turabian - Author Date Citation, 17th Edition (style guide)

The U.S. Should Adopt the "Right to Be Forgotten" Online: A Debate. Intelligence2.

Chicago / Turabian - Humanities (Notes and Bibliography) Citation, 17th Edition (style guide)

The U.S. Should Adopt the "Right to Be Forgotten" Online: A Debate Intelligence2.

Harvard Citation (style guide)

(n.d.). The U.S. should adopt the "right to be forgotten" online: a debate. Intelligence2.

MLA Citation, 9th Edition (style guide)

The U.S. Should Adopt the "Right to Be Forgotten" Online: A Debate

Note! Citations contain only title, author, edition, publisher, and year published. Citations should be used as a guideline and should be double checked for accuracy. Citation formats are based on standards as of August 2021.

Staff View

Grouped Work ID
0c014ca5-09d8-9291-714b-a7d0ec93d605-eng
Go To Grouped Work

Grouping Information

Grouped Work ID0c014ca5-09d8-9291-714b-a7d0ec93d605-eng
Full titleu s should adopt the right to be forgotten online a debate
Authorfilms media group
Grouping Categorymovie
Last Update2024-08-18 06:56:03AM
Last Indexed2025-01-30 02:02:19AM

Marc Record

First DetectedAug 13, 2024 02:33:20 PM
Last File Modification TimeAug 13, 2024 02:33:20 PM

MARC Record

LEADER05228cgm a2200697 a 4500
001ocn931094964
003OCoLC
00520240805213015.0
006m     o  c        
007vz czazuu
007cr cna||||||||
008151116p20152015nyu092        o   vleng d
019 |a 951066563|a 979818205|a 987730719|a 988231033|a 1008840501|a 1027735317|a 1037254221|a 1086984782|a 1111376129|a 1119109939|a 1132670314|a 1354798233
02840|a 94776|b Films Media Group
035 |a (OCoLC)931094964|z (OCoLC)951066563|z (OCoLC)979818205|z (OCoLC)987730719|z (OCoLC)988231033|z (OCoLC)1008840501|z (OCoLC)1027735317|z (OCoLC)1037254221|z (OCoLC)1086984782|z (OCoLC)1111376129|z (OCoLC)1119109939|z (OCoLC)1132670314|z (OCoLC)1354798233
040 |a ACCEM|b eng|c ACCEM|d OCLCO|d TUU|d OCLCF|d OCLCA|d U3G|d IWS|d NKT|d OCLCQ|d OCLCO|d CSF|d AGLDB|d CN8BJ|d OCLCQ|d FSP|d UOK|d CEF|d NYINF|d NTG|d WYU|d YOU|d HQD|d OCLCA|d CNNOR|d OCLCA|d OCLCO|d AZK|d OCLCQ
0410 |a eng|j eng|h eng
049 |a SNCA
050 4|a PN1997
08214|a [E]
24504|a The U.S. Should Adopt the "Right to Be Forgotten" Online :|b a Debate /|c Intelligence2.
2463 |a Right to Be Forgotten
264 1|a Intelligence2,|e production company.
26432|a New York, N.Y. :|b Distributed by Films Media Group,|c 2015.
264 4|c ©2015
300 |a 1 online resource (1 video file (1 hr., 31 min., 36 sec.)) :|b sound, color
336 |a two-dimensional moving image|b tdi|2 rdacontent
337 |a computer|b c|2 rdamedia
338 |a online resource|b cr|2 rdacarrier
344 |a digital|2 rda
347 |a data file|2 rda
380 |a Videorecording
500 |a Streaming video file encoded with permission for digital streaming by Films Media Group on September 09, 2015.
500 |a Title from distributor's description (Films Media Group, October 1 2015).
50500|t Introduction: Right to Be Forgotten Online Debate|g (1:22) --|t Debate "Housekeeping"|g (4:22) --|t For the Motion: Paul Nemitz|g (7:28) --|t Against the Motion: Andrew McLaughlin|g (7:16) --|t For the Motion: Eric Posner|g (7:25) --|t Against the Motion: Jonathan Zittrain|g (7:04) --|t Encouraging Censorship?|g (7:44) --|t Internet Search Results|g (3:01) --|t Chilling Effects|g (2:10) --|t Criteria for Information Removal|g (3:24) --|t Allowing Elite Abilities|g (3:32) --|t Q & A: Right Infringements|g (1:35) --|t Q & A: Google's Power|g (2:05) --|t Q & A: Law Tailored to Google|g (2:40) --|t Q & A: Administrative Criteria|g (3:03) --|t Q & A: 4th Amendment Context|g (1:45) --|t Q & A: Validity of Anonymity|g (1:34) --|t Q & A: Law Application|g (2:16) --|t Q & A: Oklahoma University Students' Racist Remarks|g (4:17) --|t Q & A: Adjudicating Power|g (3:42) --|t Concluding Statements For: Paul Nemitz|g (2:10) --|t Concluding Statements Against: Andrew McLaughlin|g (2:19) --|t Concluding Statements For: Eric Posner|g (2:02) --|t Concluding Statements Against: Jonathan Zittrain|g (2:15) --|t Debate Wrap Up|g (3:07) --|t Audience Voting Results|g (0:50) --|t Credits: The U.S. Should Adopt the "Right to Be Forgotten" Online: A Debate|g (0:58) --|t Trying Out Segment Feature|g (4:22).
506 |a Access requires authentication through Films on Demand.
520 |a In 2014, the European Union's Court of Justice ruled that individuals have a right to be forgotten online, "the right-under certain conditions-to ask search engines to remove links with personal information about them." This right is not absolute, however, but meant to be balanced against other fundamental rights, like freedom of expression. In the six months following the court's decision, Google received more than 180,000 removal requests. Of those reviewed and processed, 41% were granted. Largely seen as a victory by Europeans, the reaction among Americans was overwhelmingly negative. Was the Court of Justice's ruling a win for privacy and human dignity, or a blow to free speech and public information? Should the United States adopt the "right to be forgotten" online?
5212 |a 9 & up.
546 |a Closed-captioned.
590 |a InfoBase Learning|b Films on Demand: Master Academic Collection - US
650 0|a Data protection|x Law and legislation.
650 0|a Privacy, Right of.
650 0|a Right to be forgotten.
650 6|a Droit à l'oubli.
650 7|a Data protection|x Law and legislation.|2 fast|0 (OCoLC)fst00887963
650 7|a Privacy, Right of.|2 fast|0 (OCoLC)fst01077444
650 7|a Right to be forgotten.|2 fast|0 (OCoLC)fst01923116
655 2|a Webcast
655 7|a Educational films.|2 fast|0 (OCoLC)fst01726235
655 7|a Internet videos.|2 fast|0 (OCoLC)fst01750214
655 7|a Educational films.|2 lcgft
655 7|a Internet videos.|2 lcgft
655 7|a Films éducatifs.|2 rvmgf
655 7|a Vidéos sur Internet.|2 rvmgf
7102 |a Films Media Group,|e film distributor.
7102 |a Intelligence² (U.S.),|e production company.
77608|i Digital transfer of (manifestation):|d Intelligence2, 2015
85640|u https://login.aclibproxy.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://fod.infobase.com/portalPlaylists.aspx?e=1&xtid=94776&wid=18502
938 |a Access Educational Media|b ACEM|n 100094776
938 |a Infobase Publishing|b INFO|n 100094776
994 |a 92|b SNC