The Post-Mortem Privacy Act

[Isokratia Founder]

The Post-Mortem Privacy Act
Proposed by: Isokratia Founder

---

The World Assembly,

Acknowledging that the rapid advancement of the digital age has resulted in billions of individuals maintaining comprehensive digital footprints, consisting of private communications, financial records, biometric data, personal photographs, and search histories;

Concerned that upon a citizen's death, these deeply personal data repositories are frequently left in a legal vacuum, exposed to corporate monetization, algorithmic exploitation, or unauthorized access by third parties without the explicit prior consent of the deceased;

Believing that the fundamental right to privacy should not abruptly terminate upon biological death, and that individuals possess an inherent right to determine the final disposition of their digital selves;

Seeking to establish a uniform global framework that empowers consumers to manage their digital legacies while preventing commercial entities from exploiting the data of the deceased;

Defines the following:

1. "Digital Asset" refers to any online account, digital file, private message, financial transaction history, or personal data stored on servers operated by a commercial entity.
2. "Data Custodian" refers to any corporation, platform, or service provider that hosts, processes, or stores digital assets for users.
3. "Digital Heir" refers to an individual or entity explicitly designated by a user to manage or delete their digital assets post-mortem.

Hereby enacts as follows:

Every individual utilizing digital services within a member state shall have the legally protected right to determine the post-mortem fate of their digital assets. Data Custodians are strictly required to provide users with clear, accessible, and prominent tools within their account settings to choose one of the following directives:

• Immediate Deletion: The automatic and permanent erasure of all digital assets and personal data associated with the account upon verified notification of death.
• Legacy Transfer: The designation of a Digital Heir who will be granted specific, user-defined access to manage, download, or close the account.
• Passive Preservation: The locking or memorialization of the account, keeping it active in a static, non-public state without granting access or modification rights to anyone.

Data Custodians are strictly prohibited from compiling, analyzing, selling, or utilizing the digital assets of a deceased individual for targeted advertising, algorithmic training, or commercial profit, unless the deceased provided explicit, opt-in consent for such activities prior to their passing.


To protect the privacy of the deceased and their correspondents:

• A designated Digital Heir shall not be granted access to private, direct communications (such as private messages, emails, or direct chats) unless the deceased explicitly authorized the retrieval of those communications in their digital legacy directive or a valid legal will.
• Data Custodians must verify the identity of a Digital Heir and require official proof of the user’s death (such as a death certificate or local official notice) before executing any post-mortem directives.

Establishes:

The World Assembly Digital Legacy Commission (WADLC) as a specialized regulatory subsidiary composed of technological, legal, and human rights experts appointed by member states.

The WADLC shall publish unified technical standards for secure identity verification, maintain a public registry of platform compliance, and serve as an arbitral body for cross-border disputes when a Data Custodian in one member state fails to honor the legacy directives of a citizen in another. The WADLC shall respect sovereign judicial processes and possess no domestic criminal jurisdiction.

Member states shall establish or task relevant domestic regulatory bodies to monitor compliance within their borders, cooperating with the WADLC to enforce cross-border privacy protections. Data Custodians found violating user directives or exploiting deceased users' data shall be subject to civil penalties and fines levied by the host nation.

[Isokratia Founder]

I feel as if the wording for the Establishes cause isn't as great as it can be. I would appreciate some help there.

[Eskariador]

I sit calmly at the table as I read the document"I beleave this is a good idea but I would add that if the person has made a significant contribution to anything say a Nobel prize for example all posts by that person that contributed will be atomaticly saved as a record of history"

[Isokratia Founder]

I sit calmly at the table as I read the document"I beleave this is a good idea but I would add that if the person has made a significant contribution to anything say a Nobel prize for example all posts by that person that contributed will be atomaticly saved as a record of history"

I believe it should be a matter of choice. If say a Nobel Prize winner has social accounts they just like everyone else will have the Passive Preservation option.

Thank you for your comment though.

[Tinhampton]

How do you - the founder of "NationStates first non-WA democracy" which "actively embrace[s] alternative nations—bring your alts here to jump straight into the action!" and promotes itself using the slogan "Join the Union or Die" - expect to submit this proposal without being in the WA, never mind having two endorsements and a 75% Adoption rate? What benefit do you hope to accrue in drafting a WA proposal - not even an overtly NatSov one - while presenting yourself in all your other communications as a non-WA nation focused on establishing a community of likeminded non-WA nations?

[Isokratia Founder]

How do you expect to submit this proposal without being in the WA, never mind having two endorsements and a 75% Adoption rate?

Joining the WA takes maybe two minutes or less. While gaining two endorsements ins't particularly a difficult task and neither is achieving a 75% adoption rate.

What benefit do you hope to accrue in drafting a WA proposal

I like every other person who creates a GA proposal wishes to improve the current state of the metaverse. I don't see me benefiting much from doing so.

[...]presenting yourself in all your other communications as a non-WA nation focused on establishing a community of likeminded non-WA nations?

This is incorrect. My community is based around not requiring WA members to operate. You can still exist in my region while being a WA member and in fact are welcomed. I feel like I made that pretty clear in every place my region is advertised.

Now, do you have any questions/comments on the topic at hand (my proposal) or will you continue attempting to prohibit me from drafting.

[Zetaopalatopia]

I am neutral on this proposal. Looking at if from how it would effect me if I lived in a nation that adopted it I feel nothing changes. I die and my data dies with me, or I die and my data lives on without me. Either way I am dead so nothing that happens after has any effect on me or my rights. At best perhaps it gives slight peace of mind to those on their death bed.

[Isokratia Founder]

I am neutral on this proposal. Looking at if from how it would effect me if I lived in a nation that adopted it I feel nothing changes. I die and my data dies with me, or I die and my data lives on without me. Either way I am dead so nothing that happens after has any effect on me or my rights. At best perhaps it gives slight peace of mind to those on their death bed.

I believe this is better than corporate exploitation. That peace of mind is important.

[Zetaopalatopia]

I am neutral on this proposal. Looking at if from how it would effect me if I lived in a nation that adopted it I feel nothing changes. I die and my data dies with me, or I die and my data lives on without me. Either way I am dead so nothing that happens after has any effect on me or my rights. At best perhaps it gives slight peace of mind to those on their death bed.

I believe this is better than corporate exploitation. That peace of mind is important.

For some perhaps. For me, well I have told those around me that when I die they are free to just toss me in a ditch to save on disposal costs. I'll be dead so it really doesn't effect me. I see this proposal much the same. What happens to my reputation, things or body after death does not matter in the slightest. Hence my neutrality.

I do understand the intent, and I'll probably vote for it on the grounds that it protects the decedents. Though I do wonder, with digital libraries such as (to use a real world example) Steam, if digital heir would inherit via transfer the games therein or if that value would be erased by company policy. Perhaps outside the scope of this proposal, but digital property inheritance of hundreds or thousands of games, books movies or other cloud hosted 'owned' media and if that 'ownership' passes down, or passes away with the dead might make an interesting debate.