Search results

Master's thesis analyzes Lithuanian e-health regulation using the comparative method by analysing legal frameworks of European Union, United States of America and Australia. Due to the different international legal frameworks of e-health, it was concluded that the European Union is entering a rapid step towards unification by initiating Personal data protection regulation project, also an existing legal framework for electronic health record in United States of America is based on the strict laws of security and privacy setting, as well as Australia, which recently implemented Personally controlled electronic health record by a separate law, was found that the current Lithuanian e-health regulation is not sufficient due to the lack of legislation and it is necessary to adapt current legal framework on the basis of European Union and international practice.

AbstractThe term 'responsible AI' has been coined to denote AI that is fair and non-biased, transparent and explainable, secure and safe, privacy-proof, accountable, and to the benefit of mankind. Since 2016, a great many organizations have pledged allegiance to such principles. Amongst them are 24 AI companies that did so by posting a commitment of the kind on their website and/or by joining the 'Partnership on AI'. By means of a comprehensive web search, two questions are addressed by this study: (1) Did the signatory companies actually try to implement these principles in practice, and if so, how? (2) What are their views on the role of other societal actors in steering AI towards the stated principles (the issue of regulation)? It is concluded that some three of the largest amongst them have carried out valuable steps towards implementation, in particular by developing and open sourcing new software tools. To them, charges of mere 'ethics washing' do not apply. Moreover, some 10 companies from both the USA and Europe have publicly endorsed the position that apart from self-regulation, AI is in urgent need of governmental regulation. They mostly advocate focussing regulation on high-risk applications of AI, a policy which to them represents the sensible middle course between laissez-faire on the one hand and outright bans on technologies on the other. The future shaping of standards, ethical codes, and laws as a result of these regulatory efforts remains, of course, to be determined.

The term 'responsible AI' has been coined to denote AI that is fair and non-biased, transparent and explainable, secure and safe, privacy-proof, accountable, and to the benefit of mankind. Since 2016, a great many organizations have pledged allegiance to such principles. Amongst them are 24 AI companies that did so by posting a commitment of the kind on their website and/or by joining the 'Partnership on AI'. By means of a comprehensive web search, two questions are addressed by this study: (1) Did the signatory companies actually try to implement these principles in practice, and if so, how? (2) What are their views on the role of other societal actors in steering AI towards the stated principles (the issue of regulation)? It is concluded that some three of the largest amongst them have carried out valuable steps towards implementation, in particular by developing and open sourcing new software tools. To them, charges of mere 'ethics washing' do not apply. Moreover, some 10 companies from both the USA and Europe have publicly endorsed the position that apart from self-regulation, AI is in urgent need of governmental regulation. They mostly advocate focussing regulation on high-risk applications of AI, a policy which to them represents the sensible middle course between laissez-faire on the one hand and outright bans on technologies on the other. The future shaping of standards, ethical codes, and laws as a result of these regulatory efforts remains, of course, to be determined.

Privacy policies are known to be impenetrable, lengthy, tedious texts that are hardly read and poorly understood. Therefore, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) introduces provisions to enhance the transparency of such documents and suggests icons as visual elements to provide "in an easily visible, intelligible and clearly legible manner a meaningful overview of the intended processing." The present dissertation discusses how design, and in particular legal design, can support the concrete implementation of the GDPR's transparency obligation. Notwithstanding the many benefits that visual communication demonstrably provides, graphical elements do not improve comprehension per se. Research on graphical symbols for legal concepts is still scarce, while both the creation and consequent evaluation of icons depicting abstract or unfamiliar concepts represent a challenge. More- over, precision of representation can support the individuals' sense-making of the meaning of graphical symbols, but at the expense of simplicity and us- ability. Hence, this research proposed a methodology that combines semantic web technologies with principles of semiotics and ergonomics, and empirical methods drawn from the emerging discipline of legal design, that was used to create and evaluate DaPIS, the Data Protection Icon Set meant to support the data subjects' navigation of privacy policies. The icon set is modeled on PrOnto, an ontological representation of the GDPR, and is organized around its core modules: personal data, roles and agents, processing operations, processing purposes, legal bases, and data subjects' rights. In combination with the description of a privacy policy in the legal standard XML Akoma Ntoso, such an approach makes the icons machine-readable and semi-automatically retrievable. Icons can thus serve as information markers in lengthy privacy statements and support the navigation of the text by the data subject.

How we choose to utilize digital technology has the potential to undermine the healthy functioning of democratic systems. Surveillance practices such as the tracking, collection and profiling of our online and real-world behavior pose a direct challenge to privacy rights and democratic freedoms such as fairness and anti-discrimination. This paper aims to understand how the GDPR represents risk and, in turn, how that representation shapes protection. Using Carol Bacchi's 'What's the Problem Represented to Be?' (WPR) approach to policy analysis, we illustrate how the GDPR's dual aims of protecting both people and the free flow of personal data exist in a state of tension and that the GDPR's framing of 'public interest' privileges economic growth over individual rights. Also problematic is the assumption that people are sufficiently informed to exercise control over their data, yet are being asked to agree to practices which may undermine that very autonomy.

This paper provides an outline of the talks presented at the webinar event "The Law of Facebook: Borders, Regulation and Global Social Media" on 15 May 2020, jointly hosted by the City Law School Jean Monnet Chair of Law & Transatlantic Relations, the Institute for the study of European Law (ISEL) and the International Law and Affairs Group (ILAG). The event debated the decision in C-18/18 Glawischnig-Piesczek v. Facebook1 and the wider legislative and regulatory context of borders, global social media and transnational regulation of the internet. In C-18/18 Glawischnig-Piesczek v. Facebook the Court of Justice considered in a small three judge chamber litigation concerning an Austrian politician suing Facebook Ireland. There, the Austrian Supreme Court referred to the CJEU whether a host provider was obliged to remove posts and whether national courts can order platforms to remove content only within the national boundaries, or beyond ('worldwide'). The decision of the Court has been seen as having the capacity to determine whether domestic courts can impose monitoring obligations on digital platforms, and of what nature, and how much power courts should be given in imposing their own standards of acceptable speech across national boundaries. It features as one of a host of decisions at national and supranational level as to social media, the internet and the high-profile GDPR but also other measures such as the ECommerce Directive. Beyond the specificities of search engines, monitoring and data protection authorities and territorial limits, the panel reflected upon Facebook as a global titan of transnational social media activity and its constant battle to evade jurisdiction controls under EU law. It considered the litigation strategy of Facebook as to the EU-US Privacy Shield in litigation ongoing before the CJEU concerning data protection authorities' powers, individual enforcement of transnational agreements and worldwide jurisdiction. An outline of the individual talks of speakers is presented here next.

The new European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) imposes enhanced requirements on digital data collection. This article reports from a 2018 German nationwide population-based probability app study in which participants were asked through a GDPR compliant consent process to share a series of digital trace data, including geolocation, accelerometer data, phone and text messaging logs, app usage, and access to their address books. With about 4,300 invitees and about 650 participants, we demonstrate (1) people were just as willing to share such extensive digital trace data as they were in studies with far more limited requests; (2) despite being provided more decision-related information, participants hardly differentiated between the different data requests made; and (3) once participants gave consent, they did not tend to revoke it. We also show (4) evidence for a widely-held belief that explanations regarding data collection and data usage are often not read carefully, at least not within the app itself, indicating the need for research and user experience improvement to adequately inform and protect participants. We close with suggestions to the field for creating a seal of approval from professional organizations to help the research community promote the safe use of data.

Patient privacy is a right guaranteed by law that allows patient to conceal their medical records. However, this rights only applies in normal conditions and does not apply during a pandemic. It is often being misunderstood that broad society decided to close their medical records during this pandemic. The closing of the medical record will potentially cause the difficulty in detecting the virus' transmission. Moreover, the status of a patient recognized as pandemic-suspected is often being ignored by their family and ultimately brought home assuming that their family is in good condition. This fact has immense potential to generate a wider spread of the pandemic virus. According to the previous subject, the study will further discuss the Indonesian regulations concerning the protection of patient confidentiality during the pandemic and the legal status for those responsible for taking the pandemic-suspected patient in force. This study hopefully will be contributing to the prevention of such actions mentioned above. This study uses a normative legal approach with secondary data research. The study results show that the broad society merely understands that the confidentiality of patient privacy only applies in normal circumstances and does not apply during the pandemic situation. Moreover, the forced withdrawal of pandemic-suspected patients occurs due to society's general prejudice towards the suspected patient. Therefore, this study argues that social awareness regarding the protection of patient confidentiality is necessary to increase social knowledge about patients' rights.

The principal argument of this paper is that South Africa's current drug policy is unsound and unconstitutional. The legislative and policy framework is based on the prohibition of certain psychoactive substances deemed illicit and the criminalisation of their production, distribution and use, to wit: prohibition drug policy. This paper contends that prohibition drug policy is unsound on the grounds that it is utterly ineffective and vulgarly counterproductive. This is because prohibition drug policy fails to reduce the demand for, restrict the supply of or allay the harms associated with drugs. Furthermore, prohibition drug policy, in fact, greatly exacerbates drug-related harms for individuals and their communities. This is starkly exposed in the light of the devastating consequences pursuant to the drug war. In addition, this paper contends that prohibition drug policy, and the legislation that enacts it, the Drugs and Drug Trafficking Act, is unconstitutional. This, on the grounds that it unjustifiably violates the right to privacy, the right to freedom, and the right to human dignity. Moreover, the alternative drug policy of decriminalisation is a far less restrictive means of achieving the legitimate purpose of drug control in society. Lastly, this paper contends that prohibition drug policy ought to be replaced instead by the more effective, just and humane policy of the legal regulation of drugs. This, on the grounds that the South African constitutional dispensation compels a drug policy that takes a human rights-based, public health approach to drug control.

The article deals with the peculiarities of personal data protection, demarcates the concept of "personal data" from the concept of "information about the person", analyzes the international and national standards of data protection in foreign countries, explores the features of the American and European model of personal data protection. The rapid development of information technology and the active use of personal databases raises issues of privacy. Not the least role in the development of relevant processes is played by the global network "Internet". That is why, in recent years, the number of offenses related to the illegal collection, use and dissemination of personal information has increased. Currently, the legislation of foreign countries is undergoing significant changes, trying to develop and consolidate real mechanisms for the legal protection of personal data, as well as to regulate the circulation and dissemination of relevant information via the Internet. Despite the significant development of relevant issues in scientific circles, many issues of the system of interaction "Man - Internet" remain open and require further research and legislative regulation of the mechanism of personal information protection. The degree of protection of personal data reflects the level of fundamental human and civil rights and freedoms in the country. Each country's experience is multifaceted and has its own characteristics, which are affected by different approaches in the field of legal regulation of data protection, when the relevant rules of protection are reflected at the constitutional or legislative level, within one basic law or by referring the relevant rules of personal data protection to different sectoral laws and acts. Relevant conclusions on the need to improve the constitutional and legal regulation of personal data protection in the conditions of constant development of information technologies have been made.