公众隐私:分析欧盟框架,概述监管人工智能个人数据收集的方法

IF 3.3 3区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Akshita Rohatgi , Tae Jung Park
{"title":"公众隐私:分析欧盟框架,概述监管人工智能个人数据收集的方法","authors":"Akshita Rohatgi ,&nbsp;Tae Jung Park","doi":"10.1016/j.clsr.2025.106150","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>AI models developed using scraped personal data pose an inherent risk of <em>en-masse</em> shadow profiling to the subjects, harming their privacy, autonomy, and dignity. This paper argues that the protection of public personal data is essential to mitigate AI-scraping risks, noting that the EU is among the few to confer such protection. The GDPR regulates both public and non-public personal data similarly but contains exemptions from notice provisions in the case of legitimate interest-based processing. This exemption contributes to the information asymmetry between stakeholders who enforce anti-scraping covenants i.e., data subjects and platforms, versus scrapers. Limited supervisory powers and the lack of other mechanisms to address the problems of enforcing privacy laws in public data contribute to the GDPR’s inefficiency in controlling AI harms. The AI Act strives to plug in GDPR loopholes via reporting obligations on general-purpose AI providers to disclose the sources of their training data. Other jurisdictions could consider the principles and mechanisms of the EU regime as a guide to regulate public data scraping.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51516,"journal":{"name":"Computer Law & Security Review","volume":"57 ","pages":"Article 106150"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Privacy in the public: Analysing the EU framework to outline approaches for regulating AI personal data scraping\",\"authors\":\"Akshita Rohatgi ,&nbsp;Tae Jung Park\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.clsr.2025.106150\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>AI models developed using scraped personal data pose an inherent risk of <em>en-masse</em> shadow profiling to the subjects, harming their privacy, autonomy, and dignity. This paper argues that the protection of public personal data is essential to mitigate AI-scraping risks, noting that the EU is among the few to confer such protection. The GDPR regulates both public and non-public personal data similarly but contains exemptions from notice provisions in the case of legitimate interest-based processing. This exemption contributes to the information asymmetry between stakeholders who enforce anti-scraping covenants i.e., data subjects and platforms, versus scrapers. Limited supervisory powers and the lack of other mechanisms to address the problems of enforcing privacy laws in public data contribute to the GDPR’s inefficiency in controlling AI harms. The AI Act strives to plug in GDPR loopholes via reporting obligations on general-purpose AI providers to disclose the sources of their training data. Other jurisdictions could consider the principles and mechanisms of the EU regime as a guide to regulate public data scraping.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51516,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Computer Law & Security Review\",\"volume\":\"57 \",\"pages\":\"Article 106150\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Computer Law & Security Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212473X25000239\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computer Law & Security Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212473X25000239","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

使用抓取的个人数据开发的人工智能模型对受试者构成了大规模影子分析的固有风险,损害了他们的隐私、自主权和尊严。本文认为,保护公共个人数据对于减轻人工智能抓取风险至关重要,并指出欧盟是少数几个授予此类保护的国家之一。GDPR对公共和非公共个人数据进行了类似的监管,但在基于合法利益的处理情况下,豁免了通知条款。这种豁免导致了执行反抓取契约的利益相关者(即数据主体和平台)与抓取者之间的信息不对称。有限的监督权力和缺乏其他机制来解决在公共数据中执行隐私法的问题,导致GDPR在控制人工智能危害方面效率低下。《人工智能法案》通过报告通用人工智能提供商披露其培训数据来源的义务,努力填补GDPR漏洞。其他司法管辖区可以考虑将欧盟制度的原则和机制作为规范公共数据收集的指南。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Privacy in the public: Analysing the EU framework to outline approaches for regulating AI personal data scraping
AI models developed using scraped personal data pose an inherent risk of en-masse shadow profiling to the subjects, harming their privacy, autonomy, and dignity. This paper argues that the protection of public personal data is essential to mitigate AI-scraping risks, noting that the EU is among the few to confer such protection. The GDPR regulates both public and non-public personal data similarly but contains exemptions from notice provisions in the case of legitimate interest-based processing. This exemption contributes to the information asymmetry between stakeholders who enforce anti-scraping covenants i.e., data subjects and platforms, versus scrapers. Limited supervisory powers and the lack of other mechanisms to address the problems of enforcing privacy laws in public data contribute to the GDPR’s inefficiency in controlling AI harms. The AI Act strives to plug in GDPR loopholes via reporting obligations on general-purpose AI providers to disclose the sources of their training data. Other jurisdictions could consider the principles and mechanisms of the EU regime as a guide to regulate public data scraping.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
10.30%
发文量
81
审稿时长
67 days
期刊介绍: CLSR publishes refereed academic and practitioner papers on topics such as Web 2.0, IT security, Identity management, ID cards, RFID, interference with privacy, Internet law, telecoms regulation, online broadcasting, intellectual property, software law, e-commerce, outsourcing, data protection, EU policy, freedom of information, computer security and many other topics. In addition it provides a regular update on European Union developments, national news from more than 20 jurisdictions in both Europe and the Pacific Rim. It is looking for papers within the subject area that display good quality legal analysis and new lines of legal thought or policy development that go beyond mere description of the subject area, however accurate that may be.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信