consent - IVIR

Algorithmic systems: the consent is in the detail? external link

Internet Policy Review, vol. 9, num: 1, 2020

Abstract

Applications of algorithmically informed decisions are becoming entrenched in society, with data processing being their main process and ingredient. While these applications are progressively gaining momentum, established data protection and privacy rules have struggled to incorporate the particularities of data-intensive information societies. It is a truism to point out the resulting misalignment between algorithmic processing of personal data and the data protection regulatory frameworks that strive for meaningful control over personal data. However, the challenges to the (traditional) role and concept of consent are particularly manifest. This article examines the transformation of consent models in order to assess how the concept and the applied models of consent can be reconciled in order to correspond not only to the current regulatory landscapes but also to the exponential growth of algorithmic processing technologies. This particularly pressing area of safeguarding a basic aspect of individual control over personal data in the algorithmic era is interlinked with practical implementations of consent in the technology used and with adopted interpretations of the concept of consent, the scope of application of personal data, as well as the obligations enshrined in them. What makes consent effective as a data protection tool and how can we maintain its previous glory within the current technological challenges?

Links

algorithms, consent, frontpage, Technologie en recht

Bibtex

Article{Giannopoulou2020,
	title = {Algorithmic systems: the consent is in the detail?},
	author = {Giannopoulou, A.},
	url = {https://policyreview.info/node/1452/pdf},
	doi = {https://doi.org/10.14763/2020.1.1452},
	year = {0324},
	date = {2020-03-24},
	journal = {Internet Policy Review},
	volume = {9},
	number = {1},
	pages = {},
	abstract = {Applications of algorithmically informed decisions are becoming entrenched in society, with data processing being their main process and ingredient. While these applications are progressively gaining momentum, established data protection and privacy rules have struggled to incorporate the particularities of data-intensive information societies. It is a truism to point out the resulting misalignment between algorithmic processing of personal data and the data protection regulatory frameworks that strive for meaningful control over personal data. However, the challenges to the (traditional) role and concept of consent are particularly manifest. This article examines the transformation of consent models in order to assess how the concept and the applied models of consent can be reconciled in order to correspond not only to the current regulatory landscapes but also to the exponential growth of algorithmic processing technologies. This particularly pressing area of safeguarding a basic aspect of individual control over personal data in the algorithmic era is interlinked with practical implementations of consent in the technology used and with adopted interpretations of the concept of consent, the scope of application of personal data, as well as the obligations enshrined in them. What makes consent effective as a data protection tool and how can we maintain its previous glory within the current technological challenges?},
	keywords = {algorithms, consent, frontpage, Technologie en recht},
}

The freely given consent and the "bundling" provision under the GDPR external link

Kostić, B. & Vargas Penagos, E.

Computerrecht, vol. 2017, num: 4, pp: 217-222, 2017

Abstract

Under European data protection law, consent of the data subject is one of the six grounds for lawful processing of personal data. It is such an important ground that lawmakers considered it necessary to provide a legal definition of consent. One of the conditions under this definition is that it needs to be “freely given.” The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) 3 has further expanded on this concept in Article 7(4). It refers to a situation under which consent might not be considered “freely given.” If consent is invalid because it is not freely given, the processing is usually unlawful. Consequently, a legal basis for processing is missing. Therefore, this is an important provision. Yet the wording of this new provision is vague and its scope is unclear. Thus, the question arises as to how Article 7(4) should be applied. In this paper, the authors tease out the assessment criteria for the application of this provision on the basis of its text, structure and history. These criteria will then be applied to hypothetical cases in the final section.

Bibtex

Article{Kostić2017,
	title = {The freely given consent and the "bundling" provision under the GDPR},
	author = {Kostić, B. and Vargas Penagos, E.},
	url = {https://www.ivir.nl/publicaties/download/Computerrecht_2017_4.pdf},
	year = {0915},
	date = {2017-09-15},
	journal = {Computerrecht},
	volume = {2017},
	number = {4},
	pages = {217-222},
	abstract = {Under European data protection law, consent of the data subject is one of the six grounds for lawful processing of personal data. It is such an important ground that lawmakers considered it necessary to provide a legal definition of consent. One of the conditions under this definition is that it needs to be “freely given.” The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) 3 has further expanded on this concept in Article 7(4). It refers to a situation under which consent might not be considered “freely given.” If consent is invalid because it is not freely given, the processing is usually unlawful. Consequently, a legal basis for processing is missing. Therefore, this is an important provision. Yet the wording of this new provision is vague and its scope is unclear. Thus, the question arises as to how Article 7(4) should be applied. In this paper, the authors tease out the assessment criteria for the application of this provision on the basis of its text, structure and history. These criteria will then be applied to hypothetical cases in the final section.},
	keywords = {bundling, consent, frontpage, General Data Protection Regulation, Privacy},
}