CYIL vol. 11 (2020)

CYIL 11 (2020) THE CONTEMPORARY ISSUES OF POST-MORTEM PERSONAL DATA … themselves, who provide a post-mortem data protection policy convenient for them. For example, the Facebook’s Legacy Contact policy allows account users to turn the deceased persons account into a memorial. 14 In this regards N. Chu notes that: “Although Facebook will not provide the user’s account login details, most of the content a deceased user had previously shared (e.g., photos, posts) will remain visible. And, while most Internet websites permit only family members to cancel the account of a deceased user, anyone – regardless of their relationship to the deceased individual – can request to memorialize a deceased person’s profile, ensuring that the profile will be preserved and remain visible for as long as Facebook exists (or, longer).” 15 Such Internet services as Gmail or Hotmail that in each case review requests for access to the email accounts of the deceased to define whether it is appropriate to provide such an access or not. In its turn, OkCupid adheres to the policy that a service user’s “subscription for the Service will continue indefinitely until cancelled by (the user)”. 16 However, practice shows that it creates obstacles for relatives to delete the deceased person’s account. Other services, such as Yahoo!, support the policy that after the user’s death their account should be deleted in any case. Referring to the Justin M. Ellsworth case and the Yahoo! Service’s policy, J. C. Buitelaar correctly points out that: “when the Internet user wishes to assume the role of a responsible steward, they find Internet providers barring the way. It is curious to note these providers pretend to do so exactly for the sake of protecting the privacy of their user”. 17 A scholar even mentions that “Some providers even stake a claim of ownership in their customers’ e-mail accounts under the guise of this being necessary to protect the user’s privacy”. 18 Although these policies do not fully protect the personal data and privacy of the user of Internet services posthumously, since they are often created by corporations in accordance with their own business needs and the economic interests of such corporations as a rule take up the moral interests of the deceased and his relatives. And such a policy is natural, because nowadays personal data, even if we are talking about a deceased person’s data, is becoming a “(…) new oil of the internet and the new currency of the digital world” 19 . As C. Öhman and L. Floridi argue: “In addition to the technology giants, a plethora of start-up companies are starting to exploit the “business” of death online (…). Regardless of their niche and size, such firms mark the beginning of an increased commercialization of the afterlife existence”. 20 In his turn, T. Karppi tends to believe that the social media platforms prefer to save a deceased users’ personal data instead of removing it, in the context of which the 15 CHU, N.: Protecting Privacy after death . Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property , 2015, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 255-275. Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent. cgi?article= 1240&context=njtip. 16 OkCupid’s Terms and Conditions. Available at: https://www.okcupid.com/legal/terms. 17 BUITELAAR, J. C.: Post-mortem privacy and informational self-determination. Ethics and Information Technology , 2017, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 129-142, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-017-9421-9. 18 Ibid. 19 Meglena Kuneva, European Consumer Commissioner, March 2009, “Personal data: The Emergence of a New Asset Class”, An Initiative of the World Economic Forum, January 2011. 20 ÖHMAN, C., FLORIDI, L.: The Political Economy of Death in the Age of Information: A Critical Approach to the Digital Afterlife Industry. Minds & Machines , 2017, vol. 27, pp. 639-662, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023- 017-9445-2. 14 Facebook Help Centre: What is a legacy contact and what can they do? Available at:: https://www.facebook. com/help/1568013990080948.

229