Cargando…
Is the European Data Protection Regulation sufficient to deal with emerging data concerns relating to neurotechnology?
Research-driven technology development in the fields of the neurosciences presents interesting and potentially complicated issues around data in general and brain data specifically. The data produced from brain recordings are unlike names and addresses in that it may result from the processing of la...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8355473/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34386243 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsaa051 |
_version_ | 1783736768056524800 |
---|---|
author | Rainey, Stephen McGillivray, Kevin Akintoye, Simi Fothergill, Tyr Bublitz, Christoph Stahl, Bernd |
author_facet | Rainey, Stephen McGillivray, Kevin Akintoye, Simi Fothergill, Tyr Bublitz, Christoph Stahl, Bernd |
author_sort | Rainey, Stephen |
collection | PubMed |
description | Research-driven technology development in the fields of the neurosciences presents interesting and potentially complicated issues around data in general and brain data specifically. The data produced from brain recordings are unlike names and addresses in that it may result from the processing of largely involuntarily brain activity, it can be processed and reprocessed for different aims, and it is highly sensitive. Consenting for brain recordings of a specific type, or for a specific purpose, is complicated by these factors. Brain data collection, retention, processing, storage, and destruction are each of high ethical importance. This leads us to ask: Is the present European Data Protection Regulation sufficient to deal with emerging data concerns relating to neurotechnology? This is pressing especially in a context of rapid advancement in the fields of brain computer interfaces (BCIs), where devices that can function via recorded brain signals are expanding from research labs, through medical treatments, and beyond into consumer markets for recreational uses. One notion we develop herein is that there may be no trivial data collection when it comes to brain recording, especially where algorithmic processing is involved. This article provides analysis and discussion of some specific data protection questions related to neurotechnology, especially BCIs. In particular, whether and how brain data used in BCI-driven applications might count as personal data in a way relevant to data protection regulations. It also investigates how the nature of BCI data, as it appears in various applications, may require different interpretations of data protection concepts. Importantly, we consider brain recordings to raise questions about data sensitivity, regardless of the purpose for which they were recorded. This has data protection implications. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8355473 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-83554732021-08-11 Is the European Data Protection Regulation sufficient to deal with emerging data concerns relating to neurotechnology? Rainey, Stephen McGillivray, Kevin Akintoye, Simi Fothergill, Tyr Bublitz, Christoph Stahl, Bernd J Law Biosci Original Article Research-driven technology development in the fields of the neurosciences presents interesting and potentially complicated issues around data in general and brain data specifically. The data produced from brain recordings are unlike names and addresses in that it may result from the processing of largely involuntarily brain activity, it can be processed and reprocessed for different aims, and it is highly sensitive. Consenting for brain recordings of a specific type, or for a specific purpose, is complicated by these factors. Brain data collection, retention, processing, storage, and destruction are each of high ethical importance. This leads us to ask: Is the present European Data Protection Regulation sufficient to deal with emerging data concerns relating to neurotechnology? This is pressing especially in a context of rapid advancement in the fields of brain computer interfaces (BCIs), where devices that can function via recorded brain signals are expanding from research labs, through medical treatments, and beyond into consumer markets for recreational uses. One notion we develop herein is that there may be no trivial data collection when it comes to brain recording, especially where algorithmic processing is involved. This article provides analysis and discussion of some specific data protection questions related to neurotechnology, especially BCIs. In particular, whether and how brain data used in BCI-driven applications might count as personal data in a way relevant to data protection regulations. It also investigates how the nature of BCI data, as it appears in various applications, may require different interpretations of data protection concepts. Importantly, we consider brain recordings to raise questions about data sensitivity, regardless of the purpose for which they were recorded. This has data protection implications. Oxford University Press 2020-06-27 /pmc/articles/PMC8355473/ /pubmed/34386243 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsaa051 Text en © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Duke University School of Law, Harvard Law School, Oxford University Press, and Stanford Law School. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) ), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com |
spellingShingle | Original Article Rainey, Stephen McGillivray, Kevin Akintoye, Simi Fothergill, Tyr Bublitz, Christoph Stahl, Bernd Is the European Data Protection Regulation sufficient to deal with emerging data concerns relating to neurotechnology? |
title | Is the European Data Protection Regulation sufficient to deal with emerging data concerns relating to neurotechnology? |
title_full | Is the European Data Protection Regulation sufficient to deal with emerging data concerns relating to neurotechnology? |
title_fullStr | Is the European Data Protection Regulation sufficient to deal with emerging data concerns relating to neurotechnology? |
title_full_unstemmed | Is the European Data Protection Regulation sufficient to deal with emerging data concerns relating to neurotechnology? |
title_short | Is the European Data Protection Regulation sufficient to deal with emerging data concerns relating to neurotechnology? |
title_sort | is the european data protection regulation sufficient to deal with emerging data concerns relating to neurotechnology? |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8355473/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34386243 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsaa051 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT raineystephen istheeuropeandataprotectionregulationsufficienttodealwithemergingdataconcernsrelatingtoneurotechnology AT mcgillivraykevin istheeuropeandataprotectionregulationsufficienttodealwithemergingdataconcernsrelatingtoneurotechnology AT akintoyesimi istheeuropeandataprotectionregulationsufficienttodealwithemergingdataconcernsrelatingtoneurotechnology AT fothergilltyr istheeuropeandataprotectionregulationsufficienttodealwithemergingdataconcernsrelatingtoneurotechnology AT bublitzchristoph istheeuropeandataprotectionregulationsufficienttodealwithemergingdataconcernsrelatingtoneurotechnology AT stahlbernd istheeuropeandataprotectionregulationsufficienttodealwithemergingdataconcernsrelatingtoneurotechnology |