Search

Background: The impetus for policies promoting medical data sharing in China has gained significant traction. Nonetheless, the present legal and ethical framework governing the research use of medical data in China, is characterized by a more restrictive rather than permissive approach. The proportion of Chinese medical data being leveraged for scientific research still has room for improvement at present, indicating a significant untapped potential for advancing medical knowledge and improving healthcare outcomes. Building upon this research, we aim to delve deeper into the challenges researchers encounter in the sharing of medical data through focus group interviews. Methods: We conducted two focus group interviews study with researchers representing diverse disciplines to explore their perspectives on 21 June 2021 and 28 July 2021. A total of seventeen researchers willingly participated in this study, representing various professional backgrounds. Similar codes were merged. Research team discussions were also utilized to select interviewees' statements that were regarded as typical or representative. Results: The respondents demonstrated a strong understanding that medical data should not be disseminated arbitrarily, recognizing the importance of sharing data in compliance with laws. Through the interview, we found that although respondents stressed the importance of careful consideration regarding if and when this information can be responsibly released, none of the respondents raised the issue of necessitating consent from data subjects for the research use of medical data. This observation sharply contrasts with the stringent separate consent provisions for secondary data use outlined in the PIPL. Conclusions: The findings from the focus group studies shed light on researchers' barriers and ethical challenges towards medical data sharing for scientific research, highlighting their deep concern for data security and cautious approach to sharing. The key objectives aimed at facilitating and enabling the reuse of medical data encompass enhancing interoperability, harmonizing data standards, improving data quality, safeguarding privacy, ensuring informed consent, incentivizing patients, and establishing explicit regulations pertaining to data access and utilization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Large data-intensive health research programmes benefit from collaboration amongst researchers who may be located in different institutions and international contexts. However, complexities in navigating privacy frameworks and data protection laws across various jurisdictions pose significant challenges to researchers seeking to share or transfer data outside of institutional boundaries. Research on the awareness of data protection and privacy laws amongst stakeholders is limited. Our qualitative study, drawn from a larger project in Singapore, revealed insights into stakeholders' perceptions of the role of law in cross-national health data research. Stakeholders in our study demonstrated a range of perceptions regarding the role of data protection law in governing the collection and transfer of health data for research. The main criticisms included inadequate legal protection to data and lack of uniformed data protection standards. Despite these criticisms, participants recognised the importance of data protection law in supporting cross-border data transfers and proposed measures to improve perceived limitations of existing laws. These measures include strengthening existing legal framework, establishing contractual agreements and imposing severe punishments for data misuse. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background The impetus for policies promoting medical data sharing in China has gained significant traction. Nonetheless, the present legal and ethical framework governing the research use of medical data in China, is characterized by a more restrictive rather than permissive approach. The proportion of Chinese medical data being leveraged for scientific research still has room for improvement at present, indicating a significant untapped potential for advancing medical knowledge and improving healthcare outcomes. Building upon this research, we aim to delve deeper into the challenges researchers encounter in the sharing of medical data through focus group interviews. Methods We conducted two focus group interviews study with researchers representing diverse disciplines to explore their perspectives on 21 June 2021 and 28 July 2021. A total of seventeen researchers willingly participated in this study, representing various professional backgrounds. Similar codes were merged. Research team discussions were also utilized to select interviewees’ statements that were regarded as typical or representative. Results The respondents demonstrated a strong understanding that medical data should not be disseminated arbitrarily, recognizing the importance of sharing data in compliance with laws. Through the interview, we found that although respondents stressed the importance of careful consideration regarding if and when this information can be responsibly released, none of the respondents raised the issue of necessitating consent from data subjects for the research use of medical data. This observation sharply contrasts with the stringent separate consent provisions for secondary data use outlined in the PIPL. Conclusions The findings from the focus group studies shed light on researchers’ barriers and ethical challenges towards medical data sharing for scientific research, highlighting their deep concern for data security and cautious approach to sharing. The key objectives aimed at facilitating and enabling the reuse of medical data encompass enhancing interoperability, harmonizing data standards, improving data quality, safeguarding privacy, ensuring informed consent, incentivizing patients, and establishing explicit regulations pertaining to data access and utilization.

This article explores the challenges and implications of using artificial intelligence (AI) in education in the UK. It emphasizes the need for research to address issues such as bias, discrimination, and lack of transparency in AI systems. The redistribution of authority is also a concern, as AI algorithms shape children's education without sufficient input from teachers and parents. The article stresses the importance of considering children's rights, including their autonomy, cultural identity, and privacy, when implementing AI in educational settings. It calls for better regulation and accountability to ensure that AI tools in education are safe, effective, and respectful of children's rights. Additionally, the article raises questions about the ethical and legal basis for using children's data for commercial purposes and highlights the potential risks of tech-colonialism and its impact on culture and identity. It advocates for a balanced approach that considers evidence, provides training for educators, and empowers policymakers to make informed decisions about the use of AI in education. [Extracted from the article]

(Series Information) European Papers - A Journal on Law and Integration, 2023 8(3), 1077-1103 | European Forum Insight of 8 January 2024 | (Series Information) European Papers (News of dd month yyyy) | (Table of Contents) I. Introduction - II. From German Competition Decision to EU Judgement - II.1. Bundeskartellamt Decision B6-22/16 of 6 February 2019 - II.2. Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 4 July 2023 - III. Comment - III.1. Something new: relations between competition law and data protection - III.2. Something borrowed: Meta v Bundeskartellamt and the European Commission - III.3. Something old: arts 6 and 9 GDPR - IV. Concluding remark. | (Abstract) Meta v Bundeskartellamt is the culmination of an issue years in the making: the relation between data protection and competition. In contention is the Bka’s finding that Meta’s practice of combining personal data across its many services, in addition to data collected through the integration of its services into third-party websites and apps, constitutes a violation of competition law. In this case, the ECJ holds that a competition authority is at liberty to consider GDPR violations as a “vital clue” to a finding of abuse of dominance, provided it first requested the cooperation of the competent data protection authorities. Furthermore, it finds that, apart from consent, no legal bases from the GDPR justify Facebook’s data processing. Through the principle of sincere cooperation, the Court opens the door to further integration of data protection and competition, acknowledging that data collection is at the core of digital market companies’ business models. Although the case is based on German national law, there is reason to believe that the same line of reasoning could also apply to the European Commission, thus expanding its options in digital market oversight. In contrast, the Court’s analysis of the GDPR is not quite as innovative, but still helpfully lists and reaffirms existing law.

This work is the result of a community extension project that addresses raising awareness in society about preventing virtual crimes, focusing on the exposure of data on the internet. Developed in an interdisciplinary manner, the project was led by the professor from the Law course and by students of this course at the Lutheran Teaching Institute of Itumbiara. The main objective is to study the virtual dangers existing on the internet and the necessary methods for data protection. Thus, the aim is to prevent the harms that may arise from online exposure, including the improper use of data by cybercriminals, both in the virtual and reallife contexts, and based on this information instruct kids and adolescents about this problem. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of GeSec: Revista de Gestao e Secretariado is the property of Sindicato das Secretarias e Secretarios do Estado de Sao Paulo (SINSESP) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi is the property of Marmara University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi is the property of Marmara University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Data competition and data conflict of interest have become the core problems faced by the data industry, and the digital space produces a space-time field completely different from the physical space. Art. 25 GDPR requires the controller to not only implement the legal norms into the processing design but to do so in an effective manner. By explicitly declaring the effectiveness of the protection measures to be the legally required result, the legislator inevitably raises the question of which methods can be used to test and assure such efficacy. Our study of data tenure involves examining its logical characteristics and proposing technical regulatory measures that are effective in protecting data interests and interests. This paper utilizes the logic of field analysis to examine the ownership rules of data from the perspective of abstract legal relations. This paper proposes a data-oriented security architecture based on the expressiveness of data tenure on different subjects, reclassifies data tenure under DOSA architecture, and clarifies the process of data authentication and authorization. A hybrid cryptographic protection system is built that incorporates both the proposed improved M-AES and P-RSA algorithms. The results show that: the similarity of randomly matched documents of different data subjects is lower than 0.72, so the fingerprint similarity threshold is taken as 0.72, and through the calculation of whether the text similarity exceeds 0.72, it can accurately determine whether to carry out data rights. From the perspective of data subject tenure regulation, this paper proposes a proven technical protection method, which provides an innovative path for the protection of rights and interests in the data space. In a word, extending the legal compatibility assessment to the real effects of the required measures opens this approach to interdisciplinary methodologies.

The Indonesian government enacted the Personal Data Protection Law ('PDP Law') in September 2022. This legislation was long in the making and intended to be an urgent response to the unprecedented rise in data breaches and illegal online surveillance in the country. The PDP Law mimics several features of the EU's General Data Protection Regulation but fails to underline provisions for an independent supervisory authority. In this article, we argue that the existence of an independent data protection authority will be crucial in safeguarding the privacy of Indonesians in a meaningful manner and benefit Indonesia's long-term economic and political interests, including getting international recognition for being a safe data destination. Therefore, we propose that the Indonesian government must set up an organizationally and, more importantly, functionally independent data protection authority at the earliest possible and indicate various ways in which it can do so. This reform will be fundamental in establishing a robust data protection regime in the country, especially given the limitations of Indonesia's corrupt judicial system and the government's strong leaning towards digital sovereignty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Telehealth enables equal, high-quality, and efficient provision of health services, but it also poses serious risks in the absence of a legal basis. Despite its increasing use and promising potential, there has been no specific legal framework for telehealth in Turkey until recently. A new by-law governing the procedures and principles of telehealth services has been introduced by the Ministry of Health. As repeatedly referred to in the regulation, the most important issue is the positioning of telehealth in the data protection context. This article, therefore, aims to map telehealth services within the frame of the Turkish data protection regime. In this regard, we show how the category of personal data and the purpose of the processing should be determined. Thereafter we argue how relevant actors should be identified and present the rights and obligations of these actors in the light of basic principles regarding data processing, security, and transfer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As India moves toward enacting a comprehensive data protection legislation, it becomes essential to examine the possible application of India's proposed data protection law to the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The various challenges posed by AI to data protection principles and data principals' rights need to be examined. The need for data maximisation in the use of AI challenges the principle of collection limitation. The difficulty in anticipating the processing purposes of AI challenges the principle of purpose limitation. With a brief introduction to AI and data protection law in India, the paper examines the compatibility of various data protection provisions under India's Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 with AI. The paper also provides recommendations for data protection regulation of AI. The paper proposes the need to hold data fiduciaries accountable using Data Protection Impact Assessments, Codes of Practice and Security Measures. Besides, there is a need to define the fiduciary duty of care between the data principal and data fiduciary. There is a need recognize data protection by design and default and the Right against automated decision making. Technical solutions need to be explored, but at the same time, AI must not be over-regulated. Lastly, there is a need for flexibly interpreting the provisions of the proposed data protection law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Data law and policy assume that harms to individuals can result only from personal data processing. Conversely, generation and use of non-personal data supposedly create new value while presenting no risk to individual interests or fundamental rights. Consequently, the law treats these two categories differently, constraining generation, use, and sharing of the former while incentivizing the latter. This article challenges this assumption. It proposes to divide data-related harms into two high-level categories: unwanted disclosure and detrimental use. It demonstrates how personal/non-personal data distinction prevents unwanted disclosure but fails to capture, and unintendedly enables, detrimental use of data. As a remedy, the article proposes a new concept – data about humans – and illustrates how it could advance data law and policy.

The next decade will see increasing conflict between data privacy laws and international trade law. Governments are already concerned that privacy will be lost amid global data flows and have responded by enacting regulatory measures that might impede modern trade. While the European Union's findings of 'adequacy' offer a potentially trade-friendly solution to cross-border data flows, fewer than a dozen countries have been found adequate. In addition, more than sixty countries have enacted laws where they too evaluate the adequacy of foreign privacy laws. This splintering of data privacy law complicates global trade as more nations review and potentially restrict outbound data flows. New solutions are needed to ensure the benefits of trade while safeguarding privacy. This paper argues that a broad international agreement is needed that sets minimum standards, develops common regulatory language, and creates binding commitments in the context of data privacy and trade law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of WISTA Wirtschaft und Statistik is the property of Statistisches Bundesamt and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Blockchain technology has been rapidly growing since Bitcoin was invented in 2008. The most common type of blockchain system, public (permissionless) blockchain system, has some unique features that lead to a tension with the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and other similar data protection laws. In this paper, we report the results of a systematic literature review (SLR) on 114 research papers discussing and/or addressing such a tension. To the best of our knowledge, our SLR is the most comprehensive review of this tension, leading to a more in-depth and broader analysis of related research work on this important topic. Our results revealed three main types of issues: (i) difficulties in exercising data subjects’ rights such as the ‘right to be forgotten’ (RTBF) due to the immutable nature of public blockchains; (ii) difficulties in identifying roles and responsibilities in the public blockchain data processing ecosystem (particularly on the identification of data controllers and data processors); and (iii) ambiguities regarding the application of the relevant law(s) due to the distributed nature of blockchains. Our work also led to a better understanding of solutions for improving the GDPR compliance of public blockchain systems. It can help inform not only blockchain researchers and developers but also policymakers and law markers to consider how to reconcile the tension between public blockchain systems and data protection laws (the GDPR and beyond).

An issue that is characteristic of AI is data processing on a massive scale (giga data, Big Data). This issue is also important because of the proposition to require manufacturers to equip AI systems with a means to record information about the operation of the technology, in particular the type and magnitude of the risk posed by the technology and any negative effects that logging may have on the rights of others. Data gathering must be carried out in accordance with the applicable laws, particularly data protection laws and trade secret protection laws. Therefore, it is necessary to determine the applicable law in line with existing conflict-of-law regulations.

ICTs are essential tools for satisfying the basic needs of human beings. However, the digital age not only brings vast benefits; it also implies multiple challenges and risks for citizens. The objective of this work is to carry out a historical review of the process of recognition of the fundamental right to the protection of personal data in Ecuador until the enactment of the Organic Law on the Protection of Personal Data in 2021. The review that we present is descriptive, using the technique exploratory and allowed us to conclude that, in Ecuador, the constitutional recognition of this right is recent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper aims at providing an overview of the issues raised by algorithmic discrimination, and the key contributions proposed in the literature to address them. It is intended to be used as a starting point for those interested in approaching the topic for the first time or as a syllabus for the students taking the Erasmus+ Strategic Partnership MOOC "Time to Become Digital in Law". First, the contribution will outline what algorithms are and what we consider algorithmic bias and what are its causes. Second, it will investigate the ethical and social implications of algorithmic bias. Then, the paper will focus on how existing laws and regulations can be applied to algorithmic discrimination. This contribution will focus in particular on the two branches of law that have been identified in the literature as the most relevant in this context: anti-discrimination law and data protection law. The work will outline their potentialities and limitations, presenting some proposals advanced in the literature to fill the new and emerging gaps of protection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An issue that is characteristic of AI is data processing on a massive scale (giga data, Big Data). This issue is also important because of the proposition to require manufacturers to equip AI systems with a means to record information about the operation of the technology, in particular the type and magnitude of the risk posed by the technology and any negative effects that logging may have on the rights of others. Data gathering must be carried out in accordance with the applicable laws, particularly data protection laws and trade secret protection laws. Therefore, it is necessary to determine the applicable law in line with existing conflict-of-law regulations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Data law and policy assume that harms to individuals can result only from personal data processing. Conversely, generation and use of non-personal data supposedly create new value while presenting no risk to individual interests or fundamental rights. Consequently, the law treats these two categories differently, constraining generation, use, and sharing of the former while incentivizing the latter. This article challenges this assumption. It proposes to divide data-related harms into two high-level categories: unwanted disclosure and detrimental use. It demonstrates how personal/non-personal data distinction prevents unwanted disclosure but fails to capture, and unintendedly enables, detrimental use of data. As a remedy, the article proposes a new concept - data about humans - and illustrates how it could advance data law and policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On 15 June 2021, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ruled in case C-645/19 between Facebook and the Belgian Data Protection Authority. The CJEU offered some clarification on the General Data Protection Regulation's (GDPR) one-stop-shop mechanism. In particular, the Court addressed the question of whether a national supervisory authority that is not the lead authority can bring legal proceedings before a court in its Member State with respect to the cross-border data processing. In its judgment, the CJEU reaffirmed the allocation of competences between the 'lead' and 'concerned' supervisory authorities laid down by the GDPR, while emphasising the importance of sincere and effective cooperation between them, in order to ensure consistent and homogeneous implementation of the GDPR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Blockchain technology could bring many advantages to our society, in many different areas. In particular, it could improve individuals’ control over their data. Through blockchain, data could be shared easily and in a secure way among different actors, thus preventing its accumulation in single points of failure. As the use of blockchain technology becomes widespread, its compatibility with Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (the General Data Protection Regulation, ‘GDPR’ or ‘Regulation’ hereafter) has emerged as a point of tension. Some have argued that blockchain pursues the same objectives as the GDPR, but it does so in ways which are different from those established by the Regulation. This is mainly due to the fact that the Regulation implies a centralized data collection system, where it is possible to single out an accountable central entity, against which users’ rights have to be safeguarded. Whereas, in public permissionless blockchain projects, the network is decentralized, no single entity is responsible for it, and the decision-making power is shared among different stakeholders. It has been argued that this incompatibility, and the resulting regulatory uncertainty, will asphyxiate the development of this technology. Being the Ethereum blockchain the one which, at the time of writing, promises to be the most suitable to be adopted in a variety of use cases, this paper assesses whether, having regard to the allocation of GDPR responsibility roles, to the legal bases and principles of data processing, and to the data subject’s rights, it is possible to consider the Ethereum blockchain GDPR-compatible.

Can competition law consider effects on privacy, or should privacy concerns of data-collecting behaviour only be dealt with by data protection law? In this paper, we analyse the German Facebook case, in which the requirement of giving consent to the combination of personal data from different sources was prohibited as exploitative abuse by a dominant firm. We show, from an economic perspective, that due to the simultaneous existence of two market failures (market dominance, information and behavioural problems) and complex interaction effects between both market failures and both policies in digital markets, a new, much more complex relationship emerges. Since the traditional approach of a strict separation of both policies is no longer feasible, a more integrative and collaborative policy approach for competition law and data protection law might be necessary. With respect to the substantive issue in the Facebook case, i.e. protecting a minimum standard of choice for consumers regarding their personal data vis-a-vis dominant digital platform firms, the recent decision by the German Federal Court of Justice in this case and the proposed Digital Markets Act have led to new perspectives for dealing with privacy concerns in competition law and new forms of ex-ante regulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Immigration data form a substantial part of the border protection between countries. However, the quality and integrity of each country’s immigration data varies greatly in terms of technology and regulation. A country that has a weak a legal framework on data protection has proven to be easily abused by irresponsible parties. Including when Indonesia tries to carry out tracing by synchronizing the data in the Peduli Lindungi application with immigration data, there will be a potential violation of the privacy rights of individuals. Hence, this study applies a normative and empirical (mix) legal research methodology to analyze two keys issues: what are the advantages of synchronizing the domestic tracing application called Peduli Lindungi to the immigration data? and what kind of legal framework to prevent the misuse of personal data in Indonesia? With regulatory and comparative approaches, this study concludes without powerful legal framework, there will be no legal assurance to the promotion of privacy rights in the synchronization and the use of immigration data for health tracing purposes. From the empirical side, Indonesian’s current policy does not enable monitoring or evaluating authority to scrutinize ministerial activities in collecting and utilizing personal data. Moreover, by considering several problems of data breach in Indonesia, a single and unified data protection law is needed to integrate and provide uniformity of implementation for data protection. Keywords: data protection law, immigration, privacy rights. Mendukung Undang-Undang Perlindungan Data Keimigrasian Di Indonesia Dan Pemanfaatannya Untuk Pelacakan Kontak Abstrak Data imigrasi merupakan bagian penting dari perlindungan perbatasan antar negara. Namun, kualitas dan integritas data keimigrasian masing-masing negara sangat bervariasi dari segi teknologi dan regulasi. Negara yang memiliki kerangka hukum perlindungan data yang lemah terbukti mudah disalahgunakan oleh pihak-pihak yang tidak bertanggung jawab. Termasuk ketika Indonesia mencoba melakukan tracing dengan menyinkronkan data pada aplikasi Peduli Lindungi dengan data keimigrasian, maka akan berpotensi terjadi pelanggaran terhadap hak privasi individu. Oleh karena itu, penelitian ini menggunakan metodologi penelitian hukum normatif dan empiris (campuran) untuk menganalisis dua masalah utama: apa keuntungan dari sinkronisasi aplikasi penelusuran dalam negeri bernama Peduli Lindungi terhadap data keimigrasian? dan apa kerangka hukum untuk mencegah penyalahgunaan data pribadi di Indonesia? Dengan pendekatan regulasi dan komparatif, studi ini menyimpulkan tanpa kerangka hukum yang kuat, tidak akan ada jaminan hukum untuk promosi hak privasi dalam sinkronisasi dan penggunaan data imigrasi untuk tujuan penelusuran kesehatan. Dari sisi empiris, kebijakan Indonesia saat ini tidak memungkinkan kewenangan pemantauan atau evaluasi untuk meneliti kegiatan kementerian dalam mengumpulkan dan memanfaatkan data pribadi. Selain itu, dengan mempertimbangkan beberapa masalah pelanggaran data di Indonesia, diperlukan undang-undang perlindungan data yang tunggal dan terpadu untuk mengintegrasikan dan memberikan keseragaman implementasi perlindungan data. Kata kunci: undang-undang perlindungan data, keimigrasian, hak privasi.

Data privacy is concerned with the proper handling of sensitive data that must be protected from unauthorized parties. Given the prevalence of internet activity among Malaysians, instilling a sense of personal data protection awareness at a young age is critical. This paper aims to assess Malaysian youth netizens' knowledge of personal data and data protection awareness of personal data abuse. The methodology used was a descriptive study using online survey questionnaires as their primary tool. The random sampling method was used in the data collection process, which included 213 respondents. The findings indicate that while many respondents were uninformed of data protection, they were knowledgeable about personal data in general. Lack of data protection awareness prevents internet users from taking the necessary steps to stop further misuse of personal data, such as reporting it to the relevant authorities including the Malaysian Department of Personal Data Protection (JPDP). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Integrating AI systems into decision-making processes in the private sector may place the right to non-discrimination in danger. In order to illustrate this threat, risky fields in the private sector, namely employment, banking, advertising, pricing and insurance, were investigated in this paper with authentic examples of AI-related discrimination. Then, the current EU non-discrimination laws and data protection laws were examined, and it was found out that these EU laws do not have the necessary tools to tackle specific risks arising from AI-related discrimination in the private sector. Therefore, there is an immediate need for new EU legislation equipped with tools which explicitly target AI-related discrimination risks in the private sector. The proposed AI Act may provide new tools against AI-related discrimination in the private sector. Thus, this paper analyzes the proposed AI Act in terms of its potential impacts on mitigating AI-related discrimination risks. Due to the cradle-to-grave approach adopted by the proposed AI Act, providers and users of high-risk AI systems are required to comply with various specific ex-ante and ex-post obligations. It is found out that these obligations can contribute to the mitigation of AI-related discrimination by providing new legal tools. However, these tools are not sufficient in the face of AI-related discrimination risks. Therefore, it is concluded that the crucial need for specific legislation to mitigate AI-related discrimination risks in the private sector is still present. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In response to recent regulatory initiatives at the EU level, this article shows that training data for AI do not only play a key role in the development of AI applications, but are currently only inadequately captured by EU law. In this, I focus on three central risks of AI training data: risks of data quality, discrimination and innovation. Existing EU law, with the new copyright exception for text and data mining, only addresses a part of this risk profile adequately. Therefore, the article develops the foundations for a discrimination-sensitive quality regime for data sets and AI training, which emancipates itself from the controversial question of the applicability of data protection law to AI training data. Furthermore, it spells out concrete guidelines for the re-use of personal data for AI training purposes under the GDPR. Ultimately, the legislative and interpretive task rests in striking an appropriate balance between individual protection and the promotion of innovation. The article finishes with an assessment of the proposal for an Artificial Intelligence Act in this respect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nowadays, personal data represent a strategic asset for companies as they can significantly influence their market position. Indeed, the issues arising from the management of large amounts of data (so-called big data) are not only relevant for data protection authorities, since this practice has also induced the intervention of competition and consumer protection authorities. The digital economy has enhanced new forms of abuses of dominant position and unfair practices, which can be performed via the handling of big data. This paper starts by analysing the German antitrust authority vs Facebook decision in which the big-tech platform was sanctioned for having performed an exploitative abuse of dominant position through its data management strategy. Then, it focuses on the Italian antitrust authority vs WhatsApp decision, where WhatsApp was deemed responsible for unfair and aggressive practices aimed at extracting users' consent for data-sharing purposes. These two remarkable cases will be compared and further discussed, outlining the need to rethink the strengthening interplay between data protection, competition and consumer law, as it will entail a closer contact of the respective authorities to ensure the sustainability of digital markets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is little guidance concerning biomedical research using tissues from deceased individuals. Unique ethical and legal challenges gained visibility during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, when important studies using genome sequencing required access to biological materials from deceased individuals. These studies proposed to determine whether specific genomic profiles were associated with important disease outcomes. Such research has previously required consent from next-of-kin or other surrogate decision makers. Ethics waivers for such consent vary within Canada. In Ontario, research ethics boards can grant waivers of consent if the Tri-Council Policy Statement-2 conditions are met. These include that the individual is not harmed, that the materials are essential to the research, and that privacy will be protected. Conversely, in Quebec, Civil Code article 22 imposes an obligation on researchers to seek consent from next-of-kin or another surrogate decision maker with no option for waivers. It became evident to researchers that these standards can sometimes impose an impracticable balance of risks and benefits, especially in public health emergencies. We seek to establish why and when consent requirements should be waived for public health and research involving the tissues of deceased individuals.

This study introduces a descriptive analysis to carry out the transformation of the Dubai smart city as a case study in the GCC region with reference to the Barcelona smart city. Furthermore, to investigate how the Dubai smart city will deal with the huge amount of the collected personal data through Internet of Things devices and applications. The theoretical analysis shows that the Barcelona smart city can be represented as an effective model, its innovations recommends to be used in Dubai smart city. The analysis founds that the classification of the collected data inside smart city to open and shared data did not provide sufficient privacy for personal data. Therefore, the personal data should be classified explicitly in order to be processed separately under the rules of the data protection law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The increasing collection of personal data by online platforms causes concerns among regulators and consumers. Due to privacy-related market failures in multi-sided markets, the question of possible remedies arises. This article aims to determine if a contribution of competition law is needed to enhance data protection rules. The first part will discuss the possible types of datarelated abuses of dominance in the context of the pioneering attempt of the German competition authority. The second part will analyse the drawbacks of the German Facebook case and possibilities to reconcile it with EU competition law. In addition, the article will analyse other ways to tackle privacy issues, including the proposal for a Digital Markets Act (DMA). It is suggested that an intervention of competition law in data protection matters is unnecessary. We argue that it may prevent the emergence of innovative products and services, ultimately harm consumer welfare and competition, as well as put an undue burden on dominant undertakings. It is submitted that a coherent regulation allowing for legal certainty could serve the objective of consumer welfare while preserving the interests of undertakings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]