在一般资料保护规例下的个人资料的删除及匿名化

Žaklīna Ieviņa
{"title":"在一般资料保护规例下的个人资料的删除及匿名化","authors":"Žaklīna Ieviņa","doi":"10.25143/socr.22.2022.1.114-126","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Many controllers have a desire to be able to continue using personal data instead of deleting them after the processing purpose has been fulfilled. The discussion regularly arises whether the erasure of personal data is required by the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and whether it can also happen by anonymising the data. This article examines how the GDPR regulates the two terms of “erasure” and “anonymisation” as well as what requirements are demanded by using any of these in the personal data lifecycle. An obligation to delete personal data always requires personal data. In the case of anonymous data, erasure is not required and cannot be claimed. The question to be examined and discussed in the article is therefore: If personal data exist and there is a claim for erasure, can the obligation to erase be fulfilled by anonymising the personal data? Such question has not yet been addressed in the case law and has only been examined to a limited extent in the literature by different authors with no exact court ruling. Some authors state that the question can be answered in such a way that an obligation to delete can also be fulfilled by anonymising the data (Dierks & Roßnagel, 2021; Taeger & Gabel, 2021); meanwhile, others consider that anonymisation cannot be considered as data erasure. The answer to this question is important because it determines whether large data processors are allowed to keep data that they would have to delete and use in anonymised form for Big Data analysis or Artificial Intelligence applications that are an integral part of the world of technology.","PeriodicalId":34542,"journal":{"name":"Socrates","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Erasure and Anonymisation of Personal Data in Context of General Data Protection Regulation\",\"authors\":\"Žaklīna Ieviņa\",\"doi\":\"10.25143/socr.22.2022.1.114-126\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Many controllers have a desire to be able to continue using personal data instead of deleting them after the processing purpose has been fulfilled. The discussion regularly arises whether the erasure of personal data is required by the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and whether it can also happen by anonymising the data. This article examines how the GDPR regulates the two terms of “erasure” and “anonymisation” as well as what requirements are demanded by using any of these in the personal data lifecycle. An obligation to delete personal data always requires personal data. In the case of anonymous data, erasure is not required and cannot be claimed. The question to be examined and discussed in the article is therefore: If personal data exist and there is a claim for erasure, can the obligation to erase be fulfilled by anonymising the personal data? Such question has not yet been addressed in the case law and has only been examined to a limited extent in the literature by different authors with no exact court ruling. Some authors state that the question can be answered in such a way that an obligation to delete can also be fulfilled by anonymising the data (Dierks & Roßnagel, 2021; Taeger & Gabel, 2021); meanwhile, others consider that anonymisation cannot be considered as data erasure. The answer to this question is important because it determines whether large data processors are allowed to keep data that they would have to delete and use in anonymised form for Big Data analysis or Artificial Intelligence applications that are an integral part of the world of technology.\",\"PeriodicalId\":34542,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Socrates\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Socrates\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.25143/socr.22.2022.1.114-126\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Socrates","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25143/socr.22.2022.1.114-126","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

许多控制者希望能够继续使用个人数据,而不是在处理目的完成后将其删除。一般数据保护条例(GDPR)是否要求删除个人数据,以及是否也可以通过匿名数据来实现。本文将探讨GDPR如何规范“擦除”和“匿名化”这两个术语,以及在个人数据生命周期中使用这两个术语需要满足哪些要求。删除个人资料的义务总是需要提供个人资料。在匿名数据的情况下,不需要擦除,也不能声明。因此,本文要审查和讨论的问题是:如果个人数据存在,并且有人要求删除,是否可以通过对个人数据进行匿名处理来履行删除义务?这一问题尚未在判例法中得到解决,只是在文献中由不同的作者进行了有限程度的审查,没有确切的法院裁决。一些作者指出,可以这样回答这个问题,即通过匿名数据也可以履行删除义务(Dierks & Roßnagel, 2021;Taeger & Gabel, 2021);同时,也有人认为匿名不能被认为是数据擦除。这个问题的答案很重要,因为它决定了大型数据处理器是否被允许保留它们必须删除的数据,并以匿名形式用于大数据分析或人工智能应用,这是技术世界不可或缺的一部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Erasure and Anonymisation of Personal Data in Context of General Data Protection Regulation
Many controllers have a desire to be able to continue using personal data instead of deleting them after the processing purpose has been fulfilled. The discussion regularly arises whether the erasure of personal data is required by the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and whether it can also happen by anonymising the data. This article examines how the GDPR regulates the two terms of “erasure” and “anonymisation” as well as what requirements are demanded by using any of these in the personal data lifecycle. An obligation to delete personal data always requires personal data. In the case of anonymous data, erasure is not required and cannot be claimed. The question to be examined and discussed in the article is therefore: If personal data exist and there is a claim for erasure, can the obligation to erase be fulfilled by anonymising the personal data? Such question has not yet been addressed in the case law and has only been examined to a limited extent in the literature by different authors with no exact court ruling. Some authors state that the question can be answered in such a way that an obligation to delete can also be fulfilled by anonymising the data (Dierks & Roßnagel, 2021; Taeger & Gabel, 2021); meanwhile, others consider that anonymisation cannot be considered as data erasure. The answer to this question is important because it determines whether large data processors are allowed to keep data that they would have to delete and use in anonymised form for Big Data analysis or Artificial Intelligence applications that are an integral part of the world of technology.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信