the "right to be forgotten" on Internet searchers ought to be a

I will be running for the negative side of the "right to be forgotten" on Internet searches ought to be a civil right. Many of us had once in our life have been outraged for our right to know in the public eyes. Whether it be from a blocked website or maybe even Area 51. We all question things in our world, but do we know what they are trying to keep from us? The "right to be forgotten" on the Internet sometimes constrains us from viewing things we want to know more about. Right to be forgotten: The concept that individuals have the civil right to request that personal information be removed from the Internet. Ought: Is used to express duty and obligation. Civil Right: The right to personal liberty. Value: Property The definition of property according to Dictionary.com is the right of possession, enjoyment, or disposal of anything, especially of something tangible. Now we may not always want to dispose of some particular site of ours or for it to be blocked from us. This is highly important towards us because we may have ourselves blocked from our own website or photo because it may have been flagged. Criterion: Act Utilitarianism Act Utilitarianism is one ought always to do that act which, compared to available alternatives, maximizes utility. What is utility? Utility is the capacity of a commodity or a service to satisfy some human want.. Act-utilitarianism so understood is a test or criterion of what one should do (a test of right action, one may say). It cannot directly serve as a guide to decision making when one does not know which of the acts that one could perform will maximize utility. Associated with act-utilitarianism is an ancillary test (a guide for decision making) intended for use when one knows the value of each of the outcomes that could result from one's actions and can estimate the probability of any given outcome occurring if one does an act that might lead to it. Contention 1: State serves the will of the people Justice demands individuals should be accountable/responsible for their actions The Guardian on July 10th,2014 in an article called We Need to Talk About the Right to be Forgotten said that the article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers." This is important towards us because there should be no barrier to our freedom of expression and our thoughts and ideas. Contention 2: People can choose or give or keep the power Infringes on property's rights- shared ownership On an article called The 'Right to be Forgotten'-Worth Remembering? In 2012 Doctoral Researcher at the University of Leuven, Jef Ausloos said "By allowing people to remove their personal data at will, important information might become inaccessible, incomplete and/or misrepresentation of reality. The implementation of a fully-fledged 'right to be forgotten' might conflict with other fundamental rights such as freedom of expression and access to information." This information is important because there may come a time when we post personal information about ourselves then it becomes outdated which alleges confusion towards strangers and or employers or schools. To conclude, I have discussed my value as being property and criterion being Act Utilitarianism. My first contention being state serves the will of the people and my second one being people can choose or give or keep the power.