在資訊社會中個人資訊大量流通、數位記憶永恆、充斥偏頗與極端資訊、資訊唾手可得、資訊分析技術進步之五種環境氛圍，造成個人隱私權侵害問題不斷叢生，當代的隱私權保護法制也亟需革新。而所謂「被遺忘權」乃順應於當代資訊社會中的科技環境而生，2014年歐盟法院在Google v. AEPD一案中提出被遺忘權的概念，歐盟地區並預計於2018年落實歐盟個人資料保護規則中被遺忘權之規範，歐盟以被遺忘權作為解決政策提供了我國對於資訊時代中隱私權議題的新方向。 本文將被遺忘權之本質理解為包含「忘卻權」與「刪除權」，並定義被遺忘權為「當資料主體權益凌駕於資料控制者權益與公共利益時，資料主體有使資料控制者刪除或隱匿個人犯罪、負面、未合法處理或未成年人之個人資訊的權利」。在上述的定義下之被遺忘權能重新建構資訊社會中的記憶倫理、賦予個人對於個人資訊之掌控權、解決數位世界中的名譽侵害問題並給予未成年人高度的保障。因而於肯認被遺忘權能因應現今數位環境產生良好作用之前提下，本文認為有必要以被遺忘權來解決資訊時代中個人之隱私權侵害問題。本文最末則對於我國應如何落實被遺忘權提出幾點建議，首先，我國司法機關應扮演更積極的角色，而在被遺忘權的實際案例中勇於認事用法。再者，於我國司法機關尚未對被遺忘權提出明確判斷的情況下，本文參考歐盟立法例建議我國立法機關應於現行個人資料保護法中明訂被遺忘權之規範，且我國行政部門並應建立獨立之主管機關，並依據統一標準判斷個案中資料主體被遺忘權之請求以適當地落實被遺忘權。 ;Five characters in a network society- abundant personal information, the infinite life of digital memory, prejudiced and extreme speech, easily retrieved information and advanced data-mining technology- result in enormous privacy infringing problem which also give rise to the proposal of so-called “right to be forgotten”. In 2014, Court of Justice of the European Union recognized the concept of right to be forgotten in the case of Google v. AEPD and the general data protection regulation set out right to be forgotten which would be formally implemented in Europe by 2018. The new movement of European Union provides us the perspective that exploits right to be forgotten as a solution policy to deal with the privacy issue in a network society. This thesis regards the substance of right to be forgotten as including ‘right to oblivion’ and ‘right to erasure’ and defines right to be forgotten as “when the interest of data subject override the interest of data controller and public interest, data subject shall have the right to obtain from the controller the erasure or conceal of personal data concerning him or her criminal record, negative information, unlawfully processing information or juvenile record.” Under above definition, right to be forgotten can reconstruct the memorial ethics in a network society, empower individual the control over personal information, settle the reputation dispute in a digital world, and provide higher protection to the juvenile. It’s therefore necessary to practice right to be forgotten on the observation that the implementation of a right to be forgotten could overcome the hazard came along with the aforementioned characters in a network society, also would beneficial for the individual. To the end, this thesis suggests the judiciary should play a more positive role in recognizing the right to be forgotten in any related case. Besides, the legislature should amend right to be forgotten provision into Personal Data Protection Act by referring to the general data protection regulation when the judiciary hasn’t yet provided a clear view about right to be forgotten. To well exercise the discretion of right to be forgotten, an independent administrative agency should handle the right to be forgotten application with a consistent pattern, as well.
