Global Privacy Law Review最新文献

Editorial: Key Privacy Concepts in the EU and Canada 社论:欧盟和加拿大的关键隐私概念

Global Privacy Law Review Pub Date : 2023-05-01 DOI: 10.54648/gplr2023008

Ceyhun Necati Pehlivan

引用次数: 0

The Personal Data Under the GDPR: Concept, Elements, and Boundaries GDPR下的个人数据:概念、要素和边界

Global Privacy Law Review Pub Date : 2023-05-01 DOI: 10.54648/gplr2023009

A. B. Cordeiro

引用次数: 0

Case Note: Strengthening the Role of Google? Recent Developments in the Right to Be Forgotten Case Law of the CJEU (TU and RE v. Google LLC, C-460/20) 案例说明:加强谷歌的作用?欧洲法院“被遗忘权”判例法的最新进展(TU和RE诉Google LLC, C-460/20)

Global Privacy Law Review Pub Date : 2023-05-01 DOI: 10.54648/gplr2023010

B. Zelger

引用次数: 0

News: APAC Privacy News 新闻:亚太隐私新闻

Global Privacy Law Review Pub Date : 2023-05-01 DOI: 10.54648/gplr2023011

Alex. Roberts

引用次数: 0

Collection of Personal Information in Canadian Law 加拿大法律中的个人信息收集

Global Privacy Law Review Pub Date : 2023-05-01 DOI: 10.54648/gplr2023007

Xavier Dionne

引用次数: 0

The Fairness Principle: A Tool to Protect Childrens Rights in Their Interaction with Emotional AI in Educational Settings 公平原则:保护儿童在教育环境中与情感人工智能互动时权利的工具

Global Privacy Law Review Pub Date : 2023-02-01 DOI: 10.54648/gplr2023002

A. Atabey, R. Scarff

引用次数: 0

Opening the Black-Box in Private-Law Employment Relationships: A Critical Review of the Newly Implemented Spanish Workers’ Council’s Right to Access Algorithms 打开私法雇佣关系中的黑盒子:对新实施的西班牙工人委员会访问权算法的批判性审查

Global Privacy Law Review Pub Date : 2023-02-01 DOI: 10.54648/gplr2023003

Sergi Gálvez Durán

{"title":"Opening the Black-Box in Private-Law Employment Relationships: A Critical Review of the Newly Implemented Spanish Workers’ Council’s Right to Access Algorithms","authors":"Sergi Gálvez Durán","doi":"10.54648/gplr2023003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/gplr2023003","url":null,"abstract":"Article 22 of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) provides individuals with the right not to be subject to automated decisions. In this article, the author questions the extent to which the legal framework for automated decision-making in the GDPR is attuned to the employment context. More specifically, the author argues that an individual’s right may not be the most appropriate approach to contesting artificial intelligence (AI) based decisions in situations involving dependency contracts, such as employment relationships. Furthermore, Article 22 GDPR derogations rarely apply in the employment context, which puts organizations on the wrong track when deploying AI systems to make decisions about hiring, performance, and termination. In this scenario, emerging initiatives are calling for a shift from an individual rights perspective to a collective governance approach over data as a way to leverage collective bargaining power. Taking inspiration from these different initiatives, I propose ‘algorithmic co-governance’ to address the lack of accountability and transparency in AI-based employment decisions. Algorithmic co-governance implies giving third parties (ideally, the workforce’s legal representatives) the power to negotiate, correct, and overturn AI-based employment decision tools. In this context, Spain has implemented a law reform requiring that Workers’ Councils are informed about the ‘parameters, rules, and instructions’ on which algorithmic decision-making is based, becoming the first law in the European Union requiring employers to share information about AI-based decisions with Workers’ Councils. I use this reform to evaluate a potential algorithmic co-governance model in the workplace, highlighting some shortcomings that may deprive its quality and effectiveness.\u0000Algorithms, Artificial Intelligence, AI Systems, Automated Decision-Making, Algorithmic Co-governance, Algorithmic Management, Data Protection, Privacy, GDPR, Employment Decisions, Right To Access Algorithms, Workers’ Council","PeriodicalId":127582,"journal":{"name":"Global Privacy Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122153209","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Are Joint Controllers Joint Trade Secret Owners? What EU Data Protection and US Information Privacy Law Tell Us About Trade Secret Law 共同控制人是共同商业秘密所有人吗?欧盟数据保护法和美国信息隐私法告诉我们的商业秘密法

Global Privacy Law Review Pub Date : 2023-02-01 DOI: 10.54648/gplr2023004

Tristan Radtke

{"title":"Are Joint Controllers Joint Trade Secret Owners? What EU Data Protection and US Information Privacy Law Tell Us About Trade Secret Law","authors":"Tristan Radtke","doi":"10.54648/gplr2023004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/gplr2023004","url":null,"abstract":"The article focusses on (joint) trade secret ownership as a (neglected) aspect of European Union (EU) and United States (US) Trade Secret Law. The article shows that Information Privacy Law and Data Protection Law, respectively, and Trade Secret Law intersect. This intersection can be used to address not only the issue of unclear trade secret ownership in relation with personal data, but also the issue of power imbalance raised by considering two or more parties with entirely different bargaining positions as jointly responsible under Data Protection Law, in particular under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). In this regard, US Information Privacy and Trade Secret Law as well as EU Data Protection and Trade Secret Law and the underlying ownership and liability concepts are analysed and compared to each other. The article shows that factors for (joint) control as developed by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) (Cases Wirtschaftsakademie, Jehovah’s Witnesses (JW), and Fashion ID) can be adapted by means of interpretation in essence under EU and US Trade Secret Law. Thus, joint controllers are often considered joint owners of the respective personal data as a trade secret. According to this approach, the parties are reciprocally entitled to prevent disclosures by each other beyond what is explicitly or implicitly agreed. Such right can act as a lever for weaker parties when bargaining with ‘stronger’ parties as necessary under Data Protection Law. At the same time, the essentially unified approach of determining trade secret ownership and data protection controllership provides for more clarity when it comes to the determination of trade secret ownership.\u0000Joint Control, Trade Secrets, Ownership, Joint Ownership, UTSA, Fashion ID, Trade Secret Directive, GDPR, FTCA, US","PeriodicalId":127582,"journal":{"name":"Global Privacy Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116468243","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Editorial: Protecting Children’s Data 社论:保护儿童数据

Global Privacy Law Review Pub Date : 2023-02-01 DOI: 10.54648/gplr2023001

Ceyhun Necati Pehlivan

引用次数: 0

The Digital Services Act (DSA): A New Era for Online Harms and Intermediary Liability 数字服务法案(DSA):网络危害和中介责任的新时代

Global Privacy Law Review Pub Date : 2023-02-01 DOI: 10.54648/gplr2023005

Ceyhun Necati Pehlivan, Peter Church

引用次数: 0