GDPR - Pagina 2 van 3

Personalised pricing: The demise of the fixed price? download

pp: 174-189, 2021

Abstract

An online seller or platform is technically able to offer every consumer a different price for the same product, based on information it has about the customers. Such online price discrimination exacerbates concerns regarding the fairness and morality of price discrimination, and the possible need for regulation. In this chapter, we discuss the underlying basis of price discrimination in economic theory, and its popular perception. Our surveys show that consumers are critical and suspicious of online price discrimination. A majority consider it unacceptable and unfair, and are in favour of a ban. When stores apply online price discrimination, most consumers think they should be informed about it. We argue that the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) applies to the most controversial forms of online price discrimination, and not only requires companies to disclose their use of price discrimination, but also requires companies to ask customers for their prior consent. Industry practice, however, does not show any adoption of these two principles.

Links

algorithms, frontpage, GDPR, gegevensbescherming, Personalisation, Price discrimination, Privacy

RIS

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Poort, J.
AU  - Zuiderveen Borgesius, F.
PY  - 2021
DA  - 2021-03-04
T1  - Personalised pricing: The demise of the fixed price?
SP  - 174-189
DO  - https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108891325.014
AB  - An online seller or platform is technically able to offer every consumer a different price for the same product, based on information it has about the customers. Such online price discrimination exacerbates concerns regarding the fairness and morality of price discrimination, and the possible need for regulation. In this chapter, we discuss the underlying basis of price discrimination in economic theory, and its popular perception. Our surveys show that consumers are critical and suspicious of online price discrimination. A majority consider it unacceptable and unfair, and are in favour of a ban. When stores apply online price discrimination, most consumers think they should be informed about it. We argue that the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) applies to the most controversial forms of online price discrimination, and not only requires companies to disclose their use of price discrimination, but also requires companies to ask customers for their prior consent. Industry practice, however, does not show any adoption of these two principles.
K1  - algorithms
K1  - frontpage
K1  - GDPR
K1  - gegevensbescherming
K1  - Personalisation
K1  - Price discrimination
K1  - Privacy
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Article{Poort2021,
	title = {Personalised pricing: The demise of the fixed price?},
	author = {Poort, J. and Zuiderveen Borgesius, F.},
	url = {https://www.ivir.nl/nl/publications/personalised-pricing-the-demise-of-the-fixed-price/personalised-pricing-the-demise-of-the-fixed-price/},
	doi = {https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108891325.014},
	year = {2021},
	date = {2021-03-04},
	pages = {174-189},
	abstract = {An online seller or platform is technically able to offer every consumer a different price for the same product, based on information it has about the customers. Such online price discrimination exacerbates concerns regarding the fairness and morality of price discrimination, and the possible need for regulation. In this chapter, we discuss the underlying basis of price discrimination in economic theory, and its popular perception. Our surveys show that consumers are critical and suspicious of online price discrimination. A majority consider it unacceptable and unfair, and are in favour of a ban. When stores apply online price discrimination, most consumers think they should be informed about it. We argue that the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) applies to the most controversial forms of online price discrimination, and not only requires companies to disclose their use of price discrimination, but also requires companies to ask customers for their prior consent. Industry practice, however, does not show any adoption of these two principles.},
	keywords = {algorithms, frontpage, GDPR, gegevensbescherming, Personalisation, Price discrimination, Privacy},
}

Save .bib

Decentralised Data Processing: Personal Data Stores and the GDPR external link

Janssen, H., Cobbe, J., Norval, C. & Singh, J.

International Data Privacy Law, vol. 10, num: 4, pp: 356-384, 2021

Abstract

When it comes to online services, users have limited control over how their personal data is processed. This is partly due to the nature of the business models of those services, where data is typically stored and aggregated in data centres. This has recently led to the development of technologies aiming at leveraging user control over the processing of their personal data. Personal Data Stores (“PDSs”) represent a class of these technologies; PDSs provide users with a device, enabling them to capture, aggregate and manage their personal data. The device provides tools for users to control and monitor access, sharing and computation over data on their device. The motivation for PDSs are described as (i) to assist users with their confidentiality and privacy concerns, and/or (ii) to provide opportunities for users to transact with or otherwise monetise their data. While PDSs potentially might enable some degree of user empowerment, they raise interesting considerations and uncertainties in relation to the responsibilities under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). More specifically, the designations of responsibilities among key parties involved in PDS ecosystems are unclear. Further, the technical architecture of PDSs appears to restrict certain lawful grounds for processing, while technical means to identify certain category data, as proposed by some, may remain theoretical. We explore the considerations, uncertainties, and limitations of PDSs with respect to some key obligations under the GDPR. As PDS technologies continue to develop and proliferate, potentially providing an alternative to centralised approaches to data processing, we identify issues which require consideration by regulators, PDS platform providers and technologists.

Links

GDPR, Privacy

RIS

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Janssen, H.
AU  - Cobbe, J.
AU  - Norval, C.
AU  - Singh, J.
PY  - 0104
DA  - 2021-01-04
T1  - Decentralised Data Processing: Personal Data Stores and the GDPR
JO  - International Data Privacy Law
VL  - 10
NV  - 4
SP  - 356-384
DO  - https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/idpl/ipaa016
AB  - When it comes to online services, users have limited control over how their personal data is processed. This is partly due to the nature of the business models of those services, where data is typically stored and aggregated in data centres. This has recently led to the development of technologies aiming at leveraging user control over the processing of their personal data.
Personal Data Stores (“PDSs”) represent a class of these technologies; PDSs provide users with a device, enabling them to capture, aggregate and manage their personal data. The device provides tools for users to control and monitor access, sharing and computation over data on their device. The motivation for PDSs are described as (i) to assist users with their confidentiality and privacy concerns, and/or (ii) to provide opportunities for users to transact with or otherwise monetise their data.
While PDSs potentially might enable some degree of user empowerment, they raise interesting considerations and uncertainties in relation to the responsibilities under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). More specifically, the designations of responsibilities among key parties involved in PDS ecosystems are unclear. Further, the technical architecture of PDSs appears to restrict certain lawful grounds for processing, while technical means to identify certain category data, as proposed by some, may remain theoretical.
We explore the considerations, uncertainties, and limitations of PDSs with respect to some key obligations under the GDPR. As PDS technologies continue to develop and proliferate, potentially providing an alternative to centralised approaches to data processing, we identify issues which require consideration by regulators, PDS platform providers and technologists.
K1  - GDPR
K1  - Privacy
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Article{Janssen2021,
	title = {Decentralised Data Processing: Personal Data Stores and the GDPR},
	author = {Janssen, H. and Cobbe, J. and Norval, C. and Singh, J.},
	url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3570895
https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/IDPL-2021-4.pdf},
	doi = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/idpl/ipaa016},
	year = {0104},
	date = {2021-01-04},
	journal = {International Data Privacy Law},
	volume = {10},
	number = {4},
	pages = {356-384},
	abstract = {When it comes to online services, users have limited control over how their personal data is processed. This is partly due to the nature of the business models of those services, where data is typically stored and aggregated in data centres. This has recently led to the development of technologies aiming at leveraging user control over the processing of their personal data.
Personal Data Stores (“PDSs”) represent a class of these technologies; PDSs provide users with a device, enabling them to capture, aggregate and manage their personal data. The device provides tools for users to control and monitor access, sharing and computation over data on their device. The motivation for PDSs are described as (i) to assist users with their confidentiality and privacy concerns, and/or (ii) to provide opportunities for users to transact with or otherwise monetise their data.
While PDSs potentially might enable some degree of user empowerment, they raise interesting considerations and uncertainties in relation to the responsibilities under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). More specifically, the designations of responsibilities among key parties involved in PDS ecosystems are unclear. Further, the technical architecture of PDSs appears to restrict certain lawful grounds for processing, while technical means to identify certain category data, as proposed by some, may remain theoretical.
We explore the considerations, uncertainties, and limitations of PDSs with respect to some key obligations under the GDPR. As PDS technologies continue to develop and proliferate, potentially providing an alternative to centralised approaches to data processing, we identify issues which require consideration by regulators, PDS platform providers and technologists.},
	keywords = {GDPR, Privacy},
}

Save .bib

Data Protection or Data Frustration? Individual perceptions and attitudes towards the GDPR external link

Strycharz, J., Ausloos, J. & Helberger, N.

European Data Protection Law Review, vol. 6, num: 3, pp: 407-421, 2020

Abstract

Strengthening individual rights, enhancing control over one’s data and raising awareness were among the main aims the European Commission set for the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). In order to assess whether these aims have been met, research into individual perceptions, awareness, and understanding of the Regulation is necessary. This study thus examines individual reactions to the GDPR in order to provide insights into user agency in relation to the Regulation. More specifically, it discusses empirical data (survey with N = 1288) on individual knowledge of, reactions to, and rights exercised under the GDPR in the Netherlands. The results show high awareness of the GDPR and knowledge of individual rights. At the same time, the Dutch show substantial reactance to the Regulation and doubt the effectiveness of their individual rights. These findings point to several issues obstructing the GDPR’s effectiveness, and constitute useful signposts for policy-makers and enforcement agencies to prioritise their strategies in achieving the original aims of the Regulation.

Links

frontpage, GDPR, gegevensbescherming, Privacy

RIS

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Strycharz, J.
AU  - Ausloos, J.
AU  - Helberger, N.
PY  - 1013
DA  - 2020-10-13
T1  - Data Protection or Data Frustration? Individual perceptions and attitudes towards the GDPR
JO  - European Data Protection Law Review
VL  - 6
NV  - 3
SP  - 407-421
DO  - https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.21552/edpl/2020/3/10
AB  - Strengthening individual rights, enhancing control over one’s data and raising awareness were among the main aims the European Commission set for the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). In order to assess whether these aims have been met, research into individual perceptions, awareness, and understanding of the Regulation is necessary. This study thus examines individual reactions to the GDPR in order to provide insights into user agency in relation to the Regulation. More specifically, it discusses empirical data (survey with N = 1288) on individual knowledge of, reactions to, and rights exercised under the GDPR in the Netherlands. The results show high awareness of the GDPR and knowledge of individual rights. At the same time, the Dutch show substantial reactance to the Regulation and doubt the effectiveness of their individual rights. These findings point to several issues obstructing the GDPR’s effectiveness, and constitute useful signposts for policy-makers and enforcement agencies to prioritise their strategies in achieving the original aims of the Regulation.
K1  - frontpage
K1  - GDPR
K1  - gegevensbescherming
K1  - Privacy
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Article{Strycharz2020,
	title = {Data Protection or Data Frustration? Individual perceptions and attitudes towards the GDPR},
	author = {Strycharz, J. and Ausloos, J. and Helberger, N.},
	url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/EDPLR_2020_3.pdf},
	doi = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.21552/edpl/2020/3/10},
	year = {1013},
	date = {2020-10-13},
	journal = {European Data Protection Law Review},
	volume = {6},
	number = {3},
	pages = {407-421},
	abstract = {Strengthening individual rights, enhancing control over one’s data and raising awareness were among the main aims the European Commission set for the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). In order to assess whether these aims have been met, research into individual perceptions, awareness, and understanding of the Regulation is necessary. This study thus examines individual reactions to the GDPR in order to provide insights into user agency in relation to the Regulation. More specifically, it discusses empirical data (survey with N = 1288) on individual knowledge of, reactions to, and rights exercised under the GDPR in the Netherlands. The results show high awareness of the GDPR and knowledge of individual rights. At the same time, the Dutch show substantial reactance to the Regulation and doubt the effectiveness of their individual rights. These findings point to several issues obstructing the GDPR’s effectiveness, and constitute useful signposts for policy-makers and enforcement agencies to prioritise their strategies in achieving the original aims of the Regulation.},
	keywords = {frontpage, GDPR, gegevensbescherming, Privacy},
}

Save .bib

Schrems II and Surveillance: Third Countries’ National Security Powers in the Purview of EU Law, European Law Blog external link

Irion, K.

2020

Abstract

On 16 July 2020 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) composed as Grand Chamber delivered its landmark ruling Data Protection Commissioner v Facebook Ireland Ltd and Maximillian Schrems (case C-311/18, “Schrems II”). The focus of my commentary will be on the aspect that EU law on cross-border transfers of personal data to a third country is not deferential to national security powers of that third country. This judgment is remarkable provided that electronic surveillance conducted by Member States’ intelligence authorities for the purpose of national security is off limits for EU law and that exceptions in international agreement are fairly regularly made for national security. This contribution will deal with the embedded assessment of a third country’s national security powers under the General Data Protection Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2016/679, GDPR) and will address the criticism that a third country is held to stricter standards than a Member State of the Union.

Links

https://europeanlawblog.eu/2020/07/24/schrems-ii-and-surveillance-third-countries-national-security-powers-in-the-purview-of-eu-law/

adequacy decision, C-311/18, Charter of Fundamental Rights, Facebook, frontpage, GDPR, General Data Protection Regulation, national security, Privacy Shield, Schrems II, Standard Contractual Clauses, Surveillance, united states

RIS

TY  - BLOG
AU  - Irion, K.
PY  - 0724
DA  - 2020-07-24
T1  - Schrems II and Surveillance: Third Countries’ National Security Powers in the Purview of EU Law, European Law Blog
AB  - On 16 July 2020 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) composed as Grand Chamber delivered its landmark ruling Data Protection Commissioner v Facebook Ireland Ltd and Maximillian Schrems (case C-311/18, “Schrems II”). The focus of my commentary will be on the aspect that EU law on cross-border transfers of personal data to a third country is not deferential to national security powers of that third country. This judgment is remarkable provided that electronic surveillance conducted by Member States’ intelligence authorities for the purpose of national security is off limits for EU law and that exceptions in international agreement are fairly regularly made for national security. This contribution will deal with the embedded assessment of a third country’s national security powers under the General Data Protection Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2016/679, GDPR) and will address the criticism that a third country is held to stricter standards than a Member State of the Union.
K1  - adequacy decision
K1  - C-311/18
K1  - Charter of Fundamental Rights
K1  - Facebook
K1  - frontpage
K1  - GDPR
K1  - General Data Protection Regulation
K1  - national security
K1  - Privacy Shield
K1  - Schrems II
K1  - Standard Contractual Clauses
K1  - Surveillance
K1  - united states
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Online publication{Irion2020c,
	title = {Schrems II and Surveillance: Third Countries’ National Security Powers in the Purview of EU Law, European Law Blog},
	author = {Irion, K.},
	url = {https://europeanlawblog.eu/2020/07/24/schrems-ii-and-surveillance-third-countries-national-security-powers-in-the-purview-of-eu-law/},
	year = {0724},
	date = {2020-07-24},
	abstract = {On 16 July 2020 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) composed as Grand Chamber delivered its landmark ruling Data Protection Commissioner v Facebook Ireland Ltd and Maximillian Schrems (case C-311/18, “Schrems II”). The focus of my commentary will be on the aspect that EU law on cross-border transfers of personal data to a third country is not deferential to national security powers of that third country. This judgment is remarkable provided that electronic surveillance conducted by Member States’ intelligence authorities for the purpose of national security is off limits for EU law and that exceptions in international agreement are fairly regularly made for national security. This contribution will deal with the embedded assessment of a third country’s national security powers under the General Data Protection Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2016/679, GDPR) and will address the criticism that a third country is held to stricter standards than a Member State of the Union.},
	keywords = {adequacy decision, C-311/18, Charter of Fundamental Rights, Facebook, frontpage, GDPR, General Data Protection Regulation, national security, Privacy Shield, Schrems II, Standard Contractual Clauses, Surveillance, united states},
}

Save .bib

Harnessing the collective potential of GDPR access rights: towards an ecology of transparency external link

Mahieu, R. & Ausloos, J.

Internet Policy Review, 2020

Abstract

The GDPR’s goal of empowering citizens can only be fully realised when the collective dimensions of data subject rights are acknowledged and supported through proper enforcement. The power of the collective use of data subjects’ rights, however, is currently neither acknowledged nor properly enforced. This is the message we sent to the European Commission in response to its call for feedback for its two-year review of the GDPR. In our submission entitled Recognising and Enabling the Collective Dimension of the GDPR and the Right of Access – A call to support the governance structure of checks and balances for informational power asymmetries, we demonstrate the collective potential of GDPR access rights with a long list of real-life examples.

Links

https://policyreview.info/articles/news/harnessing-collective-potential-gdpr-access-rights-towards-ecology-transparency/1487

frontpage, GDPR, Privacy, transparantie

RIS

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Mahieu, R.
AU  - Ausloos, J.
PY  - 0717
DA  - 2020-07-17
T1  - Harnessing the collective potential of GDPR access rights: towards an ecology of transparency
JO  - Internet Policy Review
AB  - The GDPR’s goal of empowering citizens can only be fully realised when the collective dimensions of data subject rights are acknowledged and supported through proper enforcement. The power of the collective use of data subjects’ rights, however, is currently neither acknowledged nor properly enforced. This is the message we sent to the European Commission in response to its call for feedback for its two-year review of the GDPR. In our submission entitled Recognising and Enabling the Collective Dimension of the GDPR and the Right of Access – A call to support the governance structure of checks and balances for informational power asymmetries, we demonstrate the collective potential of GDPR access rights with a long list of real-life examples.
K1  - frontpage
K1  - GDPR
K1  - Privacy
K1  - transparantie
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Article{Mahieu2020,
	title = {Harnessing the collective potential of GDPR access rights: towards an ecology of transparency},
	author = {Mahieu, R. and Ausloos, J.},
	url = {https://policyreview.info/articles/news/harnessing-collective-potential-gdpr-access-rights-towards-ecology-transparency/1487},
	year = {0717},
	date = {2020-07-17},
	journal = {Internet Policy Review},
	abstract = {The GDPR’s goal of empowering citizens can only be fully realised when the collective dimensions of data subject rights are acknowledged and supported through proper enforcement. The power of the collective use of data subjects’ rights, however, is currently neither acknowledged nor properly enforced. This is the message we sent to the European Commission in response to its call for feedback for its two-year review of the GDPR. In our submission entitled Recognising and Enabling the Collective Dimension of the GDPR and the Right of Access – A call to support the governance structure of checks and balances for informational power asymmetries, we demonstrate the collective potential of GDPR access rights with a long list of real-life examples.},
	keywords = {frontpage, GDPR, Privacy, transparantie},
}

Save .bib

Pitching trade against privacy: reconciling EU governance of personal data flows with external trade external link

Irion, K. & Yakovleva, S.

International Data Privacy Law, vol. 10, num: 3, pp: 201-221, 2020

Abstract

This article positions EU’s external governance of personal data flows against the backdrop of the international controversy on digital trade versus strict privacy laws. Now that the EU has defined its position on horizontal provisions on cross-border data flows and personal data protection, it is both timely and essential to reassess its strategy on the international transfers of personal data in the purview of its future trade agreements. For its own normative approach and regulatory autonomy, the EU has a pivotal role to play in shaping the interface between trade and privacy before the ‘free trade leviathan’ can restrict the policy choices not only of individual states but also of the EU itself. Our contribution aims to break through the present compartmentalization of privacy scholarship and trade lawyers because it situates personal data flows in both disciplines.

Links

DOI: https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/idpl/ipaa003

Cross-border data flow, Digital trade, EU law, frontpage, GDPR, international trade law, Personal data, Privacy

RIS

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Irion, K.
AU  - Yakovleva, S.
PY  - 0401
DA  - 2020-04-01
T1  - Pitching trade against privacy: reconciling EU governance of personal data flows with external trade
JO  - International Data Privacy Law
VL  - 10
NV  - 3
SP  - 201-221
DO  - https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/idpl/ipaa003
AB  - This article positions EU’s external governance of personal data flows against the backdrop of the international controversy on digital trade versus strict privacy laws. Now that the EU has defined its position on horizontal provisions on cross-border data flows and personal data protection, it is both timely and essential to reassess its strategy on the international transfers of personal data in the purview of its future trade agreements. For its own normative approach and regulatory autonomy, the EU has a pivotal role to play in shaping the interface between trade and privacy before the ‘free trade leviathan’ can restrict the policy choices not only of individual states but also of the EU itself. Our contribution aims to break through the present compartmentalization of privacy scholarship and trade lawyers because it situates personal data flows in both disciplines.
K1  - Cross-border data flow
K1  - Digital trade
K1  - EU law
K1  - frontpage
K1  - GDPR
K1  - international trade law
K1  - Personal data
K1  - Privacy
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Article{Irion2020bb,
	title = {Pitching trade against privacy: reconciling EU governance of personal data flows with external trade},
	author = {Irion, K. and Yakovleva, S.},
	doi = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/idpl/ipaa003},
	year = {0401},
	date = {2020-04-01},
	journal = {International Data Privacy Law},
	volume = {10},
	number = {3},
	pages = {201-221},
	abstract = {This article positions EU’s external governance of personal data flows against the backdrop of the international controversy on digital trade versus strict privacy laws. Now that the EU has defined its position on horizontal provisions on cross-border data flows and personal data protection, it is both timely and essential to reassess its strategy on the international transfers of personal data in the purview of its future trade agreements. For its own normative approach and regulatory autonomy, the EU has a pivotal role to play in shaping the interface between trade and privacy before the ‘free trade leviathan’ can restrict the policy choices not only of individual states but also of the EU itself. Our contribution aims to break through the present compartmentalization of privacy scholarship and trade lawyers because it situates personal data flows in both disciplines.},
	keywords = {Cross-border data flow, Digital trade, EU law, frontpage, GDPR, international trade law, Personal data, Privacy},
}

Save .bib

Strengthening legal protection against discrimination by algorithms and artificial intelligence external link

Zuiderveen Borgesius, F.

The International Journal of Human Rights, 2020

Abstract

Algorithmic decision-making and other types of artificial intelligence (AI) can be used to predict who will commit crime, who will be a good employee, who will default on a loan, etc. However, algorithmic decision-making can also threaten human rights, such as the right to non-discrimination. The paper evaluates current legal protection in Europe against discriminatory algorithmic decisions. The paper shows that non-discrimination law, in particular through the concept of indirect discrimination, prohibits many types of algorithmic discrimination. Data protection law could also help to defend people against discrimination. Proper enforcement of non-discrimination law and data protection law could help to protect people. However, the paper shows that both legal instruments have severe weaknesses when applied to artificial intelligence. The paper suggests how enforcement of current rules can be improved. The paper also explores whether additional rules are needed. The paper argues for sector-specific – rather than general – rules, and outlines an approach to regulate algorithmic decision-making.

Links

https://doi-org.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2443/10.1080/13642987.2020.1743976

algoritmes, Artificial intelligence, discriminatie, frontpage, GDPR, Privacy

RIS

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Zuiderveen Borgesius, F.
PY  - 0329
DA  - 2020-03-29
T1  - Strengthening legal protection against discrimination by algorithms and artificial intelligence
JO  - The International Journal of Human Rights
AB  - Algorithmic decision-making and other types of artificial intelligence (AI) can be used to predict who will commit crime, who will be a good employee, who will default on a loan, etc. However, algorithmic decision-making can also threaten human rights, such as the right to non-discrimination. The paper evaluates current legal protection in Europe against discriminatory algorithmic decisions. The paper shows that non-discrimination law, in particular through the concept of indirect discrimination, prohibits many types of algorithmic discrimination. Data protection law could also help to defend people against discrimination. Proper enforcement of non-discrimination law and data protection law could help to protect people. However, the paper shows that both legal instruments have severe weaknesses when applied to artificial intelligence. The paper suggests how enforcement of current rules can be improved. The paper also explores whether additional rules are needed. The paper argues for sector-specific – rather than general – rules, and outlines an approach to regulate algorithmic decision-making.
K1  - algoritmes
K1  - Artificial intelligence
K1  - discriminatie
K1  - frontpage
K1  - GDPR
K1  - Privacy
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Article{Borgesius2020,
	title = {Strengthening legal protection against discrimination by algorithms and artificial intelligence},
	author = {Zuiderveen Borgesius, F.},
	url = {https://doi-org.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2443/10.1080/13642987.2020.1743976},
	year = {0329},
	date = {2020-03-29},
	journal = {The International Journal of Human Rights},
	abstract = {Algorithmic decision-making and other types of artificial intelligence (AI) can be used to predict who will commit crime, who will be a good employee, who will default on a loan, etc. However, algorithmic decision-making can also threaten human rights, such as the right to non-discrimination. The paper evaluates current legal protection in Europe against discriminatory algorithmic decisions. The paper shows that non-discrimination law, in particular through the concept of indirect discrimination, prohibits many types of algorithmic discrimination. Data protection law could also help to defend people against discrimination. Proper enforcement of non-discrimination law and data protection law could help to protect people. However, the paper shows that both legal instruments have severe weaknesses when applied to artificial intelligence. The paper suggests how enforcement of current rules can be improved. The paper also explores whether additional rules are needed. The paper argues for sector-specific – rather than general – rules, and outlines an approach to regulate algorithmic decision-making.},
	keywords = {algoritmes, Artificial intelligence, discriminatie, frontpage, GDPR, Privacy},
}

Save .bib

Getting Data Subject Rights Right: A submission to the European Data Protection Board from international data rights academics, to inform regulatory guidance external link

Ausloos, J., Veale, M. & Mahieu, R.

JIPITEC, vol. 10, num: 3, 2019

Abstract

We are a group of academics active in research and practice around data rights. We believe that the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) guidance on data rights currently under development is an important point to resolve a variety of tensions and grey areas which, if left unaddressed, may significantly undermine the fundamental right to data protection. All of us were present at the recent stakeholder event on data rights in Brussels on 4 November 2019, and it is in the context and spirit of stakeholder engagement that we have created this document to explore and provide recommendations and examples in this area. This document is based on comprehensive empirical evidence as well as CJEU case law, EDPB (and, previously, Article 29 Working Party) guidance and extensive scientific research into the scope, rationale, effects and general modalities of data rights.

Links

https://www.jipitec.eu/issues/jipitec-10-3-2019/5031

GDPR, gegevensbescherming, Privacy

RIS

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Ausloos, J.
AU  - Veale, M.
AU  - Mahieu, R.
PY  - 1231
DA  - 2019-12-31
T1  - Getting Data Subject Rights Right: A submission to the European Data Protection Board from international data rights academics, to inform regulatory guidance
JO  - JIPITEC
VL  - 10
NV  - 3
AB  - We are a group of academics active in research and practice around data rights. We believe that the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) guidance on data rights currently under development is an important point to resolve a variety of tensions and grey areas which, if left unaddressed, may significantly undermine the fundamental right to data protection. All of us were present at the recent stakeholder event on data rights in Brussels on 4 November 2019, and it is in the context and spirit of stakeholder engagement that we have created this document to explore and provide recommendations and examples in this area. This document is based on comprehensive empirical evidence as well as CJEU case law, EDPB (and, previously, Article 29 Working Party) guidance and extensive scientific research into the scope, rationale, effects and general modalities of data rights.
K1  - GDPR
K1  - gegevensbescherming
K1  - Privacy
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Article{Ausloos2020,
	title = {Getting Data Subject Rights Right: A submission to the European Data Protection Board from international data rights academics, to inform regulatory guidance},
	author = {Ausloos, J. and Veale, M. and Mahieu, R.},
	url = {https://www.jipitec.eu/issues/jipitec-10-3-2019/5031},
	year = {1231},
	date = {2019-12-31},
	journal = {JIPITEC},
	volume = {10},
	number = {3},
	abstract = {We are a group of academics active in research and practice around data rights. We believe that the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) guidance on data rights currently under development is an important point to resolve a variety of tensions and grey areas which, if left unaddressed, may significantly undermine the fundamental right to data protection. All of us were present at the recent stakeholder event on data rights in Brussels on 4 November 2019, and it is in the context and spirit of stakeholder engagement that we have created this document to explore and provide recommendations and examples in this area. This document is based on comprehensive empirical evidence as well as CJEU case law, EDPB (and, previously, Article 29 Working Party) guidance and extensive scientific research into the scope, rationale, effects and general modalities of data rights.},
	keywords = {GDPR, gegevensbescherming, Privacy},
}

Save .bib

Toward Compatibility of the EU Trade Policy with the General Data Protection Regulation external link

Yakovleva, S. & Irion, K.

AJIL Unbound, vol. 114, pp: 10-14, 2020

Abstract

The European Union’s (EU) negotiating position on cross-border data flows, which the EU has recently included in its proposal for the World Trade Organization (WTO) talks on e-commerce, not only enshrines the protection of privacy and personal data as fundamental rights, but also creates a broad exception for a Member’s restrictions on cross-border transfers of personal data. This essay argues that maintaining such a strong position in trade negotiations is essential for the EU to preserve the internal compatibility of its legal system when it comes to the right to protection of personal data under the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the recently adopted General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

Links

EU law, external trade, frontpage, GDPR, international trade law, WTO

RIS

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Yakovleva, S.
AU  - Irion, K.
PY  - 0109
DA  - 2020-01-09
T1  - Toward Compatibility of the EU Trade Policy with the General Data Protection Regulation
JO  - AJIL Unbound
VL  - 114
SP  - 10-14
DO  - https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/aju.2019.81
AB  - The European Union’s (EU) negotiating position on cross-border data flows, which the EU has recently included in its proposal for the World Trade Organization (WTO) talks on e-commerce, not only enshrines the protection of privacy and personal data as fundamental rights, but also creates a broad exception for a Member’s restrictions on cross-border transfers of personal data. This essay argues that maintaining such a strong position in trade negotiations is essential for the EU to preserve the internal compatibility of its legal system when it comes to the right to protection of personal data under the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the recently adopted General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
K1  - EU law
K1  - external trade
K1  - frontpage
K1  - GDPR
K1  - international trade law
K1  - WTO
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Article{https://doi.org/10.1017/aju.2019.81,
	title = {Toward Compatibility of the EU Trade Policy with the General Data Protection Regulation},
	author = {Yakovleva, S. and Irion, K.},
	url = {https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-journal-of-international-law/article/toward-compatibility-of-the-eu-trade-policy-with-the-general-data-protection-regulation/04D5070244733CAEFDAA14C533BAFF7E/share/b44381ff85510e8580104599385baab8c1e3179e},
	doi = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/aju.2019.81},
	year = {0109},
	date = {2020-01-09},
	journal = {AJIL Unbound},
	volume = {114},
	pages = {10-14},
	abstract = {The European Union’s (EU) negotiating position on cross-border data flows, which the EU has recently included in its proposal for the World Trade Organization (WTO) talks on e-commerce, not only enshrines the protection of privacy and personal data as fundamental rights, but also creates a broad exception for a Member’s restrictions on cross-border transfers of personal data. This essay argues that maintaining such a strong position in trade negotiations is essential for the EU to preserve the internal compatibility of its legal system when it comes to the right to protection of personal data under the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the recently adopted General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).},
	keywords = {EU law, external trade, frontpage, GDPR, international trade law, WTO},
}

Save .bib

Access and Reuse of Machine-Generated Data for Scientific Research external link

Giannopoulou, A.

Erasmus Law Review, num: 2, pp: 155-165, 2019

Abstract

Data driven innovation holds the potential in transforming current business and knowledge discovery models. For this reason, data sharing has become one of the central points of interest for the European Commission towards the creation of a Digital Single Market. The value of automatically generated data, which are collected by Internet-connected objects (IoT), is increasing: from smart houses to wearables, machine-generated data hold significant potential for growth, learning, and problem solving. Facilitating researchers in order to provide access to these types of data implies not only the articulation of existing legal obstacles and of proposed legal solutions but also the understanding of the incentives that motivate the sharing of the data in question. What are the legal tools that researchers can use to gain access and reuse rights in the context of their research?

Links

frontpage, GDPR, Internet of Things, machine-generated data, Personal data, Privacy, scientific research

RIS

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Giannopoulou, A.
PY  - 1220
DA  - 2019-12-20
T1  - Access and Reuse of Machine-Generated Data for Scientific Research
JO  - Erasmus Law Review
NV  - 2
SP  - 155-165
DO  - https://doi.org/10.5553/ELR.000136
AB  - Data driven innovation holds the potential in transforming current business and knowledge discovery models. For this reason, data sharing has become one of the central points of interest for the European Commission towards the creation of a Digital Single Market. The value of automatically generated data, which are collected by Internet-connected objects (IoT), is increasing: from smart houses to wearables, machine-generated data hold significant potential for growth, learning, and problem solving. Facilitating researchers in order to provide access to these types of data implies not only the articulation of existing legal obstacles and of proposed legal solutions but also the understanding of the incentives that motivate the sharing of the data in question. What are the legal tools that researchers can use to gain
access and reuse rights in the context of their research?
K1  - frontpage
K1  - GDPR
K1  - Internet of Things
K1  - machine-generated data
K1  - Personal data
K1  - Privacy
K1  - scientific research
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Article{Giannopoulou2019bb,
	title = {Access and Reuse of Machine-Generated Data for Scientific Research},
	author = {Giannopoulou, A.},
	url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Erasmus_Law_Review_2019.pdf},
	doi = {https://doi.org/10.5553/ELR.000136},
	year = {1220},
	date = {2019-12-20},
	journal = {Erasmus Law Review},
	number = {2},
	pages = {155-165},
	abstract = {Data driven innovation holds the potential in transforming current business and knowledge discovery models. For this reason, data sharing has become one of the central points of interest for the European Commission towards the creation of a Digital Single Market. The value of automatically generated data, which are collected by Internet-connected objects (IoT), is increasing: from smart houses to wearables, machine-generated data hold significant potential for growth, learning, and problem solving. Facilitating researchers in order to provide access to these types of data implies not only the articulation of existing legal obstacles and of proposed legal solutions but also the understanding of the incentives that motivate the sharing of the data in question. What are the legal tools that researchers can use to gain
access and reuse rights in the context of their research?},
	keywords = {frontpage, GDPR, Internet of Things, machine-generated data, Personal data, Privacy, scientific research},
}

Save .bib