Suchergebnisse

Offers a rich analysis of the meaning of 'data subjects' and 'vulnerability' within the context of the General Data Protection Regulation. It seeks to reconceptualise data subjects' vulnerability in the digital age and to promote a 'vulnerability-aware' interpretation of the GDPR.

This paper attempts to find a much-needed balance between data protection rights and trade secret rights on customer information in the European Union framework. Our analysis proposes a "shared management" of secret data between businesses and customers based on an operation of de-contextualization of customer databases. Several rights are in conflict in these two legal domains. For instance, the right to access to personal data and the new proposed right to "data portability" conflict with the interests of trade secret holders. What is even more problematic is that both analyzed legal frameworks are more and more based on a "proprietary" approach to data: they are both a form of abstract "monopoly". In a first step we analyze, in comparison with USA law, when and how the scope of data protection and trade secret protection coincide in practice, according to the proposed EU reforms in the field. As illustrated by literature, balancing rules in these two frameworks are vague and schizophrenic. However, from a literal interpretation of the analyzed it is possible to understand a "favor" for data protection rights. In analyzing the apparent favor to personality rights compared to other (e.g., economic) rights we investigate (both in USA and selected European states) trade secrets in the perspective of personality rights and data protection rights. As a result of our study we propose a change in perspective from the contrast between customers and businesses, to the conflict between customers and businessmen that enables us to verify whether and when personality rights of data subjects affect the above-mentioned personality rights of businessman in practice. the paper proposes to "decontextualize" secret data so that customers can access only data strictly related to their biographical information while trade secret holders can be free not to disclose the output of their data processing (behavior evaluation, forecast, studies on life expectancy, personalized marketing plan, pricing, etc.) if disclosure can adversely affect their interests. In this framework the "proprietary" approach of European laws must be caught as an opportunity, not as an obstacle: we can consider secret data as a "shared good" of customers and businessmen. A multi-level management of data should be based on interests that are common to customers and trade secret holders (secrecy and data updating).