big data: new challenges for law and...

BIGDATA:NEWCHALLENGESFORLAWANDETHICS

Internationalscientificconference22-23May2017

FacultyofLaw,UniversityofLjubljana

Poljanskinasip2,Ljubljana,Slovenia

2

TableofContents

AbouttheConference 4

Keynotespeakers 5

ContactInformationandRegistration 8

Programme 9

Abstracts 15"ButIusedquotationmarks"-datasciencemethodsandmisinterpretations 15

TjerkTiman 15(Anti)DiscriminationandBigDataConsumerCreditRiskAnalysis 15

GavinRobinson 15AlgorithmicPatrol:TheFuturesofPredictivePolicing 16

DeanWilson 16Algorithmicpredictionincrimecontrol 16

AlešZavršnik 16Anonymisationofjudicialdecisionswithmachinelearning 17

MatejKovačič,AljažKošmerlj 17AutomatedCybercrimeInvestigations:Theexampleof“Sweetie2.0” 17

GregorUrbas 17BigData–BigIgnorance 18

RenataSalecl 18BigDataandEconomicCyberEspionage:anInternationalLawPerspective 18

MarušaT.Veber 18BigDatainCriminalJustice–FewChancesandSeriousRisks 18

UweEwald 18BigData,DataProtectionandCitizenEmpowerment:TheRevivalofIndividualParticipationPrincipleasaResponsetoNewTechnologicalChallenges 19

WenlongLi 19BigData,PsychodiagnosticsandThreatstoPersonalAutonomy 19

FriderikKlampfer,BojanMusil,NenadČušBabičandDomenBajde 19Bighealthdataonsocialnetworkingplatforms:Thelegalandethicalquestions 20

MariaTzanou 20Cross-borderexchangeofbigdata-innovativetechnologymeetsoutdatedlegalframework 21

StanislawTosza 21DatabasesandDueProcesswithregardtoEuropeanCourtofHumanRights’Case-Law 21

BegümBulakUygun 21Dispensablehumansandindispensablemachinesinthecontextofclassandsocialcontrol 22

ZoranKanduč 22EconomicCyberEspionageandRegulationofBigDataTheftattheInternationalLevel 23

MašaKovičDine 23Findingtherightbalancebetweensecurityandprivacy:NATOandthebigdataanalyses 23

MitkoBogdanoski,MetodiHadji-Janev 23FiveReasonsNottoPersonifyAI 23

JoannaJ.Bryson 23HealthcareRobotsandtheRighttoPrivacy 24

TjašaZapušek 24Hidinglargeamountsofdatainvirtualdiskimages 24

3

GašperFele-Žorž,AndrejBrodnik, 24HowAretheAustralianMetadataLawsAffectingtheAverageSocialMediaUser? 25

CarolinaAre 25Howdopublicsectorvaluesgetintopublicsectormachinelearningsystems,ifatall? 25

MichaelVeale 25Individualcontroloverpersonaldatainthedata-driveneconomy 26

HelenaUršič 26Judicialoversightof(mass)collectingandprocessingofpersonaldata 26

PrimožGorkič 26LimitsofthecurrentstateofArtificialIntelligenceforLaw 26

MarkoGrobelnik 26Livinglabsandbigdatainpractice:Stratumseind2.0-AdiscussionofalivinglabintheNetherlands 27

MasaGalic 27NATO’sNewChallenge:Synchronizing“Dots”,“Bullets”and“Skills” 27

MitkoBogdanoskiandMetodiHadji-Janev 27Personaldataforcommongood:howtoprofitfromBigDatasustainably 28

NadyaPurtova 28PersonalDataProtectioninSocialSciencesinBigDataEra 28

JanezŠtebe,SonjaBezjak,IrenaBolkoandAnaSlavec 28Pricing(big)data:therighttoknowthevalueofourownpersonaldata 28

GianclaudioMalgieri 28ProtectingIndividualRightsWithBasicToolsintheHigh-TechEra 29

SorinaIoanaDoroga 29Reconfiguringfreedom:Bigdata,theInvestigatoryPowersAct2016andtheconstructionoflibertyintheUK’ssecuritystate. 29

LydiaMorgan 29SlavetotheAlgo-rhythm?LegalandtechnologicalstickingpointsconcerningmachinelearningandtheGDPR 30

LilianEdwardsandMichaelVeale 30Sloveniancriminalintelligenceactivityandprotectionofprivacy 31

SabinaZgaga 31Socialnetwork,socialprofiling,predictivepolicing.Currentissuesandfutureperspectives 31

FedericoCostantini 31State’sDueDiligenceinCyberspaceintheEraofBigData 31

VasilkaSancin 31Thealluringpromiseofobjectivity:Bigdataincriminaljustice 32

MojcaPlesničar 32Wedon’tknowwhattheQuestionsare,butweknowwe'regonnafindtheAnswers 32

AlexanderCzadilek,ChristofTschohlandWalterHötzendorfer 32

AbouttheVenue 34

MapoftheBuildingoftheFacultyofLaw 35

VENUE:FacultyofLawinLjubljana 36

HOSTCITY:Ljubljana 38

OTHERIMPORTANTINFORMATION 39

Notes 40

4

AbouttheConference

“BigData”isaphrasethathasbeenusedpervasivelybythemediaandthelaypublicinthelastseveralyears.Amongstmanyotherfields,socialcontrolandcrimecontrolinparticularhavebecomeoneofthekeyemergingusecasesofbigdata.Forexample,policepredictivesoftwareproduceprobabilityreportsoncriminalityandassureusthatbyusingthis,societieswillreducecrime.Otherprogramsarelookingforpatternsthatwouldhelpuspredictaterroristattack.Criminaljusticesystemsareusingtechnologicalsolutiontoo,forinstance,topredictfuturecrimesofthoseapplyingforbailorthosetobesentonaparole.Underlyingtheseandmanyotherpotentialusesofbigdataincrimecontrol,however,areaseriesoflegalandethicalchallengesrelatingto,amongotherthingstoprivacy,discrimination,andpresumptionofinnocence.Theleadingquestionstheconferencespeakerwilltackleare:

• howtheoperationsofsociety,politicalsystems,and,inparticular,socialcontrolandcrimecontrol,ischangingduetolargedatabasesandalgorithmicdataminingandpredictingpowers?

• Willcomputersdecidewhotoprosecuteandwhoshouldbesenttojail?• Whichprogrammesandsystemsofalgorithmicpredictionsarealreadyinplaceinthecriminaljustice

systemsaroundtheglobe?• Whythiscanbedangerousintermsoffundamentalhumanrightsandfundamentalprinciplesof

democraticsocieties?• IsthenewGDPRasuitableframeworkfor»algocracy«,i.e.rulebythealgorithm?• Howcanweproposesolutionsthatmaynothinderthedevelopmentofthetechnology,butenable

morenuanced,ethicallyandlegallysoundsolutionstobedevelopedinthefuture?

Weinvitepaperproposalsfromscholarsacrossthesocialsciencesandhumanitiesstudyingbigdatachallengesforlawandethics.Themesofinterestinclude(tentativelist):

• bigdataandcrimecontrol• predictivepolicing• automatedjustice• bigdataanddiscrimination• bigdataandsocialsorting• ethicaldilemmasandpredictiveanalytics• bigdataandinternationallaw• bigdataandpersonaldataprotectionlaw• bigdataandcyberespionage• bigdataandcitizenempowerment

5

Keynotespeakers

• DeanWilson,UniversityofSussex,Brighton,UK• NadyaPurtova,TILT,TilburgUniversity,TheNetherlands• JoannaJ.Bryson,UniversityofBath,UK,andaffil.atTheCenterforInformationTechnologyPolicy,

PrincetonUniversity,USA• MarkoGrobelnik,JozefStefanInstitute,Slovenia• TjerkTiman,TILT/UniversityofTilburg• AlexanderCzadilek,ChristofTschohlandWalterHötzendorfer,epicenter.works,ResearchInstitute

Vienna• RenataSalecl,InstituteofCriminologyattheFacultyofLaw,Slovenia• AlešZavršnik,InstituteofCriminologyattheFacultyofLaw,Slovenia

DeanWilsonwasalecturerandthenseniorlecturerincriminologyatMonashUniversity,Melbourne,Australiabetween2003and2010andaReaderinCriminologyattheUniversityofPlymouthpriortojoiningtheUniversityofSussexin2015,whereheisProfessorofCriminologyintheDepartmentofSociology,SchoolofLaw,PoliticsandSociology.Dean’skeyresearchinterestsareinsurveillanceandpolicing,andhehaspublishedwidelyintheareasofhistoriesofurbanpolicing,contemporarypolicing,surveillanceandmostrecentlypre-emptionandcriminaljustice.Hismostrecentpublication(withJudeMcCulloch)Pre-Crime:Pre-emption,precautionandthefuturewaspublishedbyRoutledgein2016.DeanisalsoCo-DirectoroftheinternationalSurveillanceStudiesNetwork,andanAssociateEditorofthejournalSurveillance&Society.

NadyaPurtovaisanAssistantProfessoratTilburgInstituteforLaw,Technology,andSociety,TilburgUniversity,whereshedoesresearchondataprotectionandinformationalprivacylaw,propertyrightsinpersonaldataandeconomicanalysisofdataprotectionlaw.NadyaobtainedherPhDinlaw(cumlaude)in2011fromTilburgUniversity.Herdissertationonpropertyrightsinpersonaldata(TilburgUniversityBestDoctoralDissertationAwardfor2010/11)ispublishedbyKluwerLawInternational.In2016shewasawardedtheEuropeanResearchCouncil(ERC)StartingGranttoconductafive-yearresearchprojectaimedtoreconfigurelegalprotectionofpeopleagainstinformation-inducedharmsbasedonbetterunderstandingofinformationrootedinlaw,economics,andinformationstudies(ERC-2016-StG-716971INFO-LEG).

JoannaJ.Brysonisatransdisciplinaryresearcheronthestructureanddynamicsofhuman-andanimal-likeintelligence.Herresearchcoverstopicsrangingfromartificialintelligence,throughautonomyandrobotethics,andontohumancooperation.Bryson'sfirstdegreeisinBehaviouralScience(non-clinicalpsychology)fromChicago(1986),shealsoholdsanMScinArtificialIntelligenceandanMPhilinPsychologyfromEdinburgh(1992,2000)andaPhDinArtificialIntelligencefromMIT(2001).BrysonjoinedBathin2002intheirDepartmentofComputerScience,whereshewaspromotedtoReader(tenuredassociateprofessor)in2010.ShefoundedandforseveralyearsleadtheirIntelligentSystemsresearchgroup,andisaffiliatedwithBath'sInstitutesforPolicyResearchandMathematicalInnovation,aswellastheirCentresforNetworksandCollectiveBehaviourandforDigitalEntertainment.ShehasheldvisitingacademicpositionswithPrinceton'sCenterforInformationTechnologyPolicy(wheresheisstillaffiliated),theMannheimCentreforSocialScienceResearch(MZES,2011-2014),theDepartmentofAnthropologyOxford(HarveyWhitehouse'sExplainingReligionproject,2010-2011),TheMethods&DataInstituteatNottingham(agent-basedmodellinginpoliticalscience2007-2008),andtheKonradLorenzInstituteforEvolution&CognitionResearchinAustria(onthebiologicaloriginsofculture,2007-2009).BeforecomingtoBath,sheconductedacademicresearchinEdinburgh'sHumanCommunicationResearchCentre(1999-2000),andHarvard'sDepartmentofPsychology(2001-2002).Additionally,shehasprofessionalexperienceinChicago'sfinancialindustry(1986-1991),internationalorganizationmanagementconsultancy(1993-1994),andindustrialAIresearch(forLEGO,1995,1998).BrysonhasservedontheSenate,Council,andCourtfortheUniversityofBath,representingtheAcademicAssembly.SheispresentlyamemberoftheCollegeoftheBritishEngineeringandPhysicalSciencesResearchCouncil(EPSRC)andservesasamemberoftheeditorialboardforseveralacademicjournals,includingAdaptiveBehaviour,AI&Society,ConnectionScience,andTheInternationalJournalofSyntheticEmotions.

6

MarkoGrobelnikisaresearcherinthefieldofArtificialIntelligence(AI).FocusedareasofexpertiseareMachineLearning,Data/Text/WebMining,NetworkAnalysis,SemanticTechnologies,DeepTextUnderstanding,andDataVisualization.Markoco-leadsArtificialIntelligenceLabatJozefStefanInstituteandistheCEOofQuintelligence.comspecializedinsolvingcomplexAIproblemsforthecommercialworld.HecollaborateswithmajorEuropeanacademicinstitutionsandmajorindustriessuchasBloomberg,BritishTelecom,EuropeanCommission,MicrosoftResearch,NewYorkTimes.Markoisco-authorofseveralbooks,co-founderofseveralstart-upsandis/wasinvolvedintoover50EUfundedresearchprojectsonvariousfieldsofArtificialIntelligence.In2016MarkobecameDigitalChampionofSloveniaatEuropeanCommission.

TjerkTimanisapostdocresearcheronsurveillanceandprivacyintheVICIprojectofprof.Bert-JaapKoopsatTilburgInstituteforLaw,Technology,andSociety/UniversityofTilburg.

ChristofTschohlisICTengineerandlawyerandservessince2012asScientificDirectoroftheResearchInstitute–DigitalHumanRightsCenterinVienna.HeisprimarilyinchargeofthedevelopmentofresearchprojectsandpublicationsonHumanRightsandInformationTechnologyandhasbeenemployedmanyyearsasalegalresearcherfortheLudwigBoltzmannInstituteofHumanRightsandaspost-docProjectAssistantattheUniversityofVienna.Mr.Tschohlisfurthermorethechairmanofepicenter.works,formerly“workingpartyondataretention”(AKVorrat.at).ThisNGOtookactionagainstthecomprehensiveblanketdataretentionoftrafficdatarecordsofallpubliccommunicationservicesandsuccessfullyconductedalawsuit,supportedby11.167people,attheAustrianconstitutionalcourtinthiscase.TogetherwithapreliminaryrequestfromIrelandthisleadtotheabolitionoftheDataRetentionDirectivebytheEuropeanCourtofJustice(CJEU)inApril2014.

WalterHötzendorferisSeniorResearcherandSeniorConsultantattheResearchInstitute,BoardMemberoftheAustrianComputerSociety(OCG)andCo-ChairoftheOCGForumPrivacy.Hehasdegreesinlawaswellasinbusinessinformatics(informationsystems)andexperienceinresearch,legalcounsellingandsoftwareengineering.From2011to2016hewasaResearcherattheUniversityofViennaCentreforComputersandLaw,wherehehasworkedinseveralnationalandinternationalresearchprojectsanddidaPhDonDataProtectionandPrivacybyDesigninFederatedIdentityManagement.Walter’sresearchinterestsspandataprotectionlaw,privacybydesign,privacyengineering,electronicidentities,publicsecurity,informationsecurity,cloudcomputing,telecommunicationandthelegalaspectsoftheseandotherfieldsofICT.

AlexanderCzadilekissince2015lawyeratepicenter.works(formerlyAKVorrat.at)inVienna,whichis,sinceitssuccessfulcampaignfortheanullmentofthedataretentiondirective,commitedtothefightagainstmasssurveillance.InadditiontothisheisalegalreasearcheratResearchInstitute–DigitalHumanRightsCenterandconsultantatky-center,athinktankforsocialmedialaw(Vaduz,Vienna,Munich).Hedealswithdataprotectionlawformorethantenyearsandisauthorandspeakerinthefieldsofdataprotectionlaw,privacyandsurveillance.Heiscommitedtothepreservationoffreedomrightsandapluralisticsociety.

TheResearchInstitute(RI)isayoungprivateresearchandconsultingcentreatthecuttingpointoftechnology,lawandsociety,whichcoversquestionsabouthumanrightsinadigitalsocietythroughamulti-andinterdisciplinaryperspective.Thiscoverstechnologicalandlegalaspectsofdataprotectionanddatasecurityaswellastechnologicalimpactassessment,cybercrimeandpoliticalstrategies.

RenataSaleclisaSlovenephilosopher,sociologistandlegaltheorist.SheisaseniorresearcherattheInstituteofCriminology,FacultyofLawattheUniversityofLjubljana,andholdsaprofessorshipatBirkbeckCollege,UniversityofLondon.ShehasbeenavisitingprofessoratLondonSchoolofEconomics,lecturingonthetopicofemotionsandlaw.EveryyearshelecturesatBenjaminN.CardozoSchoolofLaw(NewYork),onPsychoanalysisandLaw,andshehasalsobeenteachingcoursesonneuroscienceandlaw.From2012,furthermore,sheisvisitingprofessorattheDepartmentofSocialScience,HeathandMedicineatKing'sCollegeLondon.Herbooksinclude:Salecl,R.(2000).Sexuation.Durham,NorthCarolina:DukeUniversityPress;Salecl,R.(2004).Onanxiety.LondonNewYork:Routledge;andSalecl,R.(2010).Choice.London:Profile.Thebookshavebeentranslatedintothirteenlanguages.

7

AlešZavršnik,DoctorofLaw(LL.D.),isaSeniorResearchFellowattheInstituteofCriminologyattheFacultyofLawinLjubljanaandAssociateProfessorattheFacultyofLawUniversityofLjubljana.HewasapostdoctoralfellowattheUniversityofOslo(2012)andattheMax-Planck-InstitutefürausländischesundinternationalsStrafrecht,Freiburgi.Br.(2009),andisstartingwithVisitingFellowshipattheCollegiumHelveticumZürich,ajointinitiativeoftheETHZürichandtheUniversityofZürich(2017-18).HecollaboratedinseveralEuropeanCooperationinScienceandTechnology(COST)Actions,e.g.LivinginSurveillanceSocieties.InhislatestresearchZavršnikfocusedonsurveillanceimplicationsofdronesinthebookheeditedDronesandUnmannedAerialsystems:LegalandSocialImplicationsforSecurityandSurveillance.Healsoco-editedabookCrimeandTransitioninCentralandEasternEuropethatwasawardedforthebestscientificachievementincriminologybytheSlovenianResearchAgencyin2012.Hehasextensivelyresearchedandpublishedoncybercrime,IT-law,surveillance,crimecontrolandtechnology.ZavršnikconductsethicalanalysisforsecurityandICTprojects,e.g.heisanindependentEthicsExpertwithREA,theresearcharmoftheEuropeanCommission,forHorizon2020projects.Amongothers,heledaresearchprojectLawintheAgeofBigData:RegulatingPrivacy,Transparency,SecrecyandOtherCompetingValuesinthe21stCentury(fundedbytheSlovenianResearchAgency,No.J5-6823).E-mail:[email protected].

8

ContactInformationandRegistration

Theconferenceisorganizedwithintheresearchproject»Lawintheageofbigdata:Regulatingprivacy,transparency,secrecyandothercompetingvaluesinthe21stcentury«carriedoutattheInstituteofCriminologyattheFacultyofLawLjubljanaandFacultyofLawUniversityofLjubljana,andcoordinatedbyAssoc.ProfessorAlešZavršnik.ItisfundedbytheSlovenianResearchAgency.VenueFacultyofLaw,UniversityofLjubljana,Poljanskinasip2,SI-1000Ljubljana,SloveniaChairoftheProgramCommittee

AlešZavršnik,LL.D.,Assoc.ProfessorProgramCommittee

• ProfessorFrankPasquale,UniversityofMaryland,Baltimore,USA• ProfessorRenataSalecl,InstituteofCriminologyattheFacultyofLaw,Slovenia• ProfessorKatjaŠugmanStubbs,FacultyofLaw,UniversityofLjubljana,Slovenia• AssociateProfessorPrimožGorkič,FacultyofLaw,UniversityofLjubljana,Slovenia

OrganisingCommittee

• mag.MarušaVeber• mag.MašaKovič-Dine• dr.MojcaM.Plesničar• KatjaSimončič,JuniorResearcher• MihaHafner,JuniorResearcher

• LaraBrecelj• KlaraCvar• MašaGril• NejaDomnik

ContactAlešZavršnik,LL.D.,Assist.Prof.,E:ales.zavrsnik@pf.uni-lj.siInstituteofCriminologyattheFacultyofLawLjubljana,E:[email protected]:+386(0)14203242

ConferencefeesParticipantsoftheconference,i.e.speakersanddelegatesnotpresentingapaper,havetopayaconferencefee;unlessinvitedorstudents(inthelattercase,pleaseprovideproof).Thefollowingconferencefeesapply:

• fullpass-speakers:100EUR• fullpass-delegates(notpresentingapaper):70EUR• fullpass-VIPs(invited,uponanappointment):FREE• students:freeofcharge(proofmustbeprovided)• Earlybird(untilApril22,2017):75EURforspeakers;40EURfordelegates.

Delegatesandstudentscanregisterviae-mail:[email protected]:SI56020140253359987,SWIFT/BIC:LJBASI2X(Novaljubljanskabankad.d.,Trgrepublike2,1520Ljubljana,Slovenija).Accountholder:InstituteofCriminologyattheFacultyofLawLjubljana,Poljanskinasip2,1000Ljubljana,Slovenia.Youagreethatyourpersonaldatawillbecollectedandprocessedfortheconferencepurposes.Thebanktransferistheonlypaymentmethodavailable.Attheconference,youmustprovidetheproofofpayment.

9

Programme

MONDAY22ndMAY

Hour Lecturehall

8:30–9:00 REGISTRATION Gold

Hour INTRODUCITONANDWELCOME Lecturehall

9:00–9:30 Prof.MatjažJager,DirectoroftheInstituteofCriminologyattheFacultyofLaw

Prof.MihaJuhart,DeanoftheFacultyofLaw,UniversityofLjubljana

Gold

Keynotesession1

Chair:AlešZavršnik

9:30–11:00

MarkoGrobelnik:

LimitsofthecurrentstateofArtificialIntelligenceforLaw

DeanWilson:

AlgorithmicPatrol:TheFuturesofPredictivePolicing

Gold

11:00–11:30 Coffeebreak

11:30–13:00 Keynotesession2


NadyaPurtova:

Personaldataforcommongood:howtoprofitfromBigDatasustainably

AlexanderCzadilek,ChristofTschohlandWalterHötzendorfer:

Wedon’tknowwhattheQuestionsare,butweknowwe’regonnafindtheAnswers

Gold

13:00–14:00 Lunch

10

MONDAY22ndMAYBIG DATA AND PERSONAL DATA BIG DATA AND CRIMINAL PROTECTION PROCEDURE

Session2

Seminarroom5

Chair:KatjaSimončič

1. SabinaZgaga:Sloveniancriminalintelligenceactivityandprotectionofprivacy

2. PrimožGorkič:Judicialoversightof(mass)collectingandprocessingofpersonaldata

3. CarolinaAre:HowAretheAustralianMetadataLawsAffectingtheAverageSocialMediaUser?

4. BegümBulakUygu:DatabasesandDueProcesswithregardtoEuropeanCourtofHumanRights’Case-Law

Hour

Session1

Seminarroom4

Chair:MojcaM.Plesničar

14:00–15:30 1. HelenaUršič:Individualcontroloverpersonaldatainthedata-driveneconomy

2. LilianEdwardsand

MichaelVeale:SlavetotheAlgo-rhythm?LegalandtechnologicalstickingpointsconcerningmachinelearningandtheGDPR

3. WenlongLi:BigData,DataProtectionandCitizenEmpowerment

4. MašaGalič:Livinglabsandbigdatainpractice:Stratumseind2.0-AdiscussionofalivinglabintheNetherlands


11

HUMAN RIGHTS, CRIMINAL JUSTICE BIG DATA POLICING AND BIG DATA

Session4

Seminarroom5

Chair:MihaHafner

1. GregorUrbas:AutomatedCybercrimeInvestigations:Theexampleof“Sweetie2.0”

2. StanislawTosza:Cross-borderexchangeofbigdata-innovativetechnologymeetsoutdatedlegalframework

3. FedericoCostantini:Socialnetwork,socialprofiling,predictivepolicing.CurrentIssuesandfutureperspectives

4. LydiaMorgan:Reconfiguringfreedom:Bigdata,theInvestigatoryPowersAct2016andtheconstructionoflibertyintheUK’ssecuritystate

Hour Session3

Seminarroom4

Chair:PrimožGorkič

16:00–17:30 1. SorinaIoanaDoroga:ProtectingIndividualRightsWithBasicToolsintheHigh-TechEra

2. MojcaM.Plesničar:Thealluringpromiseofobjectivity:Bigdataincriminaljustice

3. GavinRobinson:(Anti)DiscriminationandBigDataConsumerCreditRiskAnalysis

4. UweEwald:BigDatainCriminalJustice–FewChancesandSeriousRisks

Hour

17:30– WELCOMERECEPTION–FACULTYOFLAW MainHall

12

TUESDAY23rdMAY

Hour Lecturehall

8:30–9:00 REGISTRATION Red

Hour Keynotesession3


Lecturehall

9:00–10:30

JoannaJ.Bryson:

FiveReasonsNottoPersonifyAIRenataSalecl:BigData–BigIgnorance

Red


11:00–12:30 Keynotesession4


Lecturehall

TjerkTiman:

“ButIusedquotationmarks”:datasciencemethodsandmisinterpretationsAlešZavršnik:Algorithmicpredictionincrimecontrol

Red

12:30–13:30 Lunch

13

TUESDAY23rdMAY

BIG DATA KNOWLEDGE BIG CYBER DATA AND INTERNATIONAL LAW

Hour Session5

Seminarroom4

Chair:MihaHafner

13:30–15:00 1. MichaelVeale:Howdopublicsectorvaluesgetintopublicsectormachinelearningsystems,ifatall?

2. MatejKovačič,AljažKošmerlj:Anonymisationofjudicialdecisionswithmachinelearning

3. JanezŠtebe,SonjaBezjak,IrenaBolkoandAnaSlavec:PersonalDataProtectioninSocialSciencesinBigDataEra

4. GašperFele-Žorž,AndrejBrodnik:Hidinglargeamountsofdatainvirtualdiskimages

Session6

Seminarroom5

Chair:KatjaSimončič

1. VasilkaSancin:State’sDueDiligenceinCyberspaceintheEraofBigData

2. MitkoBogdanoskiandMetodiHadji-Janev:Findingtherightbalancebetweensecurityandprivacy:NATOandthebigdataanalyses

3. MarušaT.Veber:BigDataandEconomicCyberEspionage:anInternationalLawPerspective

4. MašaKovičDine:EconomicCyberEspionageandRegulationofBigDataTheftattheInternationalLevel


14

SOCIAL, ECONOMIC & HEALTH ASPECTS OF BIG DATA

*Changestotheprogramcanbemadeintherun-uptotheconference.Allthechangeswillbedisplayedintheprogrampublishedontheconferencewebpage.Theorganizersshallnotbeliableforanyloss,liability,damageorexpensessufferedorincurredbyanypersonduetothechanges.

Hour Session7

Redlecturehall

Chair:MarušaT.Veber

15:30–17:00 1. ZoranKanduč:Dispensablehumansandindispensablemachinesinthecontextofclassandsocialcontrol

2. GianclaudioMalgieri:Pricing(big)data:therighttoknowthevalueofourownpersonaldata

3. FriderikKlampfer,BojanMusil,NenadČušBabičandDomenBajde:BigData,PsychodiagnosticsandThreatstoPersonalAutonomy

4. TjašaZapušek:HealthcareRobotsandtheRighttoPrivacy

Hour Redlecturehall


17.00-17.15 CONCLUDINGREMARKS

15

Abstracts

"ButIusedquotationmarks"-datasciencemethodsandmisinterpretationsTjerkTiman

TILT/UniversityofTilburg

WhereasBigDatainitselfisadebatableterm(forcomputerscienceitmeansdatathatistoolargetocomputebyasinglemachine,whereforsocialscienceitmeansdataistoolargetoanalyzebyonehumanresearcher),itisalsoadecontextualizedone,andthereforitleadstomanyhypedandconfusingpromisesinsociety.Questionsriseaboutbigdatabywhomandforwhom.AsSTSresearchers,wehavetoaskwhatkindofimpactBDhas,orcanhave,onsociety,butalsowhatkindofreflectionBDisgivingofsociety.Wherethenaturalscienceshavealreadyadaptedtoacomputationalandoftenquantitativewayofworking,manysocialsciencesarenowconfrontedwithnotonlyastrongerfocusonquantitativemethodsofworking(alsomoreandmoreasthesoleacceptedmethodofworking!),butalsohavetodealwithlargerheapsofdata.

Inanextremescenario,thepromiseofreal-lifedatameanstheendofsocialscience(onecananalyze“everything”realtimewithrealdata).However,manydisciplinesinsocialscienceandthereformanytypesofknowledgearestillinductive(notdeductive).Whilemachinescanmakedataintootherformsofdataandpossiblyevencantranslatedataintoformsofinformation,thisinformationstillneedshumansandcontextsinordertoproducesomeformofanaddedvalue.Inthatsense,thisnewpossiblereal-timequantitativeturnisnothingnew;itsjustmore.Thisalsomeansthatifsocialsciencewanttoremainrelevant,itneedstobeabletocounterpurelyquantitativeclaimsandunderstandathingortwoaboutdatasciencemethods.Onewayofdoingsoistocreatenewalliances-wherebeforeitwasmathandstats,nowitsdatascientistandprogrammers-andgetintosomedatasciencemethodsandtillsthemselves(yes,thisalsoholdsforlawyers!).

InthistalkIwillbrieflygointosometheoreticalassumptionsonBigData/datascienceandviadatasciencepracticesandexamples,Iwillshowhowmisinterpretationanddecontextualisationofdataleadtonon-sensicalanalysisandstrangerepresentationsofpeopleviaskeweddatadoubles.Iwillconcludebyattemptingamakeconnectionbetweentechnicalandlegalunderstandingsofwhatpersonaldatacanbe.

(Anti)DiscriminationandBigDataConsumerCreditRiskAnalysisGavinRobinson

UniversityofLuxembourg

RecentUKlegislationfacilitatingthecreditscoringofSMEsusingBigDatatechniquesandOpenDatasourcesthreatenstohollowoutinformationmanagementnormsanddatasubjectrightsenshrinedinprivacyanddataprotectionlawjustasitisgatheringunprecedentedmomentumincourtsand,withtheimpendingapplicationoftheGeneralDataProtectionRegulation,inpracticeacrosstheEU.Atthenationallevel,andhoweverBrexitmaypanout,itisdoubtfulthattheregulatoryre-shufflingandprivacy-relatedsafeguardsbundledintothelegislativestimulusforSMEcreditriskscoringarelikelytoaddressadequatelytheseriousaccuracy,transparencyandaccountabilityconcernsofindividualdatasubjectswhoselifechancesitalters.Wouldtheeffective,fullenforcementofdataprotectionprinciplesanddatasubjectrightsreallycripplethecreditreferenceindustrytothedetrimentofthenascenteconomicrecovery,oristhereamiddlepathandwilltheGDPRprovideit?

Thispaperproposestotackleaparticularlythornyaspectofthatdebate:therelationshipbetweencreditriskanalysisandantidiscrimination.Itbeginsbysurveyingthecutting-edgeofconsumercreditrisktools,productsforwhich“alldataiscreditdata”:theirsources,processesand(unforeseen)impactsoncitizens.Thelatter,

16

oft-neglectedaspectisthenunpackedwiththeemphasisplacedonthecompatibilityofsuchtoolswiththeletterandthespiritofantidiscriminationlawsonthebooksintheUSandtheEU.Thisinturnimpliesareviewoftherecent,abundant(mainlyUS)literatureondiscriminationinthe“scoredsociety”(Zarsky),“blackboxes”(Pasquale)anddisparateimpact(Barocas&Selbst),butalsoofitsfarscarcerEuropeancounterpart–andthisinthelightofEU-levelantidiscriminationnorms(e.g.Article21,CharterofFundamentalRightsoftheEuropeanUnion).Isever-more-granularBigData-poweredcreditriskanalysisatallcompatiblewithsuchvalues?WhatmightbetheimpactoftheGDPRinthisregard?Howoughtitsmuch-vauntedprovisionsonprofilingbeinterpretedinordertoincreasethetransparencyofcreditscorersvis-à-visthescored–andhowaretheylikelytobeinterpreted?

AlgorithmicPatrol:TheFuturesofPredictivePolicing

DeanWilsonUniversityofSussex

‘PredictivePolicing’hasemergedasthekeybuzztermofcontemporarypolicing.Engagingpredictiveanalyticsdrawnfromsuchdiversedomainsasdisasterprediction,combatsituationsandsupply-chainmanagement,predictivepolicingextendsthepromiseofanticipatingcrimepriortoitsactualization.Marketingmaterialsarerepletewithstridentclaimsoffuturecrimesthatarecalculable,knowableandtargetablebeforetheytranspire.Additionally,predictivepolicingispromotedastheidealpolicingtechnologyforaclimateoffiscalausterity,withthecapacitytodirectpoliceoperationsinacost-effectivefashion–removingthenecessityfor‘costly’measuressuchascommunityengagement.Thischapterinterrogatestheclaimsofpredictivepolicing,contextualizingthemagainstthelongertrajectoryofinformationtechnologywithinpoliceorganizations.Predictivepolicingalsoemergeswithinacontextofsecuritycommodificationwhereastutemarketinghasadvancedtheviewthatfuturecriminalacts–andpersons–canberenderedvisibleandactionableinthepresent.Incommonwiththecentraltenetsofdataism,thereisalsoanunderlyinglogicthatpredictionswillberenderedevermoreprecisethroughtheaccumulationandintegrationofanever-expandingarrayofdatasets.Whileacknowledgingthattheoutcomesofpredictivepolicingarelikelytobehighlycontingent,bothorganizationallyandgeographically,itisarguedthatitrepresentsapotentiallydisturbingtrendincontemporarypolicing.Thelimitedevaluationevidencetodatesuggestsanelectiveaffinitybetweenpredictivepolicingandthe‘criminologiesofeverydaylife’suchasrationalchoiceandroutineactivitiestheory,thatprivilegeasocialtechnicalsolutions.TheintegrationofSOCMINT(SocialMediaIntelligence)alsopresagesformsofalgorithmicallyguided‘real-time’anticipatorypolicing–theconsequencesofwhichremainuncertain.Nevertheless,itisarguedthatpatternsofdiscriminatorypolicingandtheirattendantmilitaristiclogicsmaywellescalate,whilesimultaneouslyremainingobscuredbeneaththesheenofalgorithmiccalculation.

AlgorithmicpredictionincrimecontrolAlešZavršnik

InstituteofCriminologyattheFacultyofLaw

Thepaperwillpresentseveralexistentusesofbigdatainthecriminaljusticesystem,forexample,forthepreventionofpaymentcardfraudbymeansofskimming;forthepredictionofcrimewithpredictivesoftware;theuseofalgorithmstopredicttherecidivismofparolees.Suchknowledge,builtonalargeamountofseeminglyunrelateddata,whosecredibilityisbasedoncomplexmathematicalalgorithms,maylegitimiseincreasedsocialcontrol,limitprivacyandunderminethebasicprinciplesofcriminalprocedure.Takingintoconsiderationthebenefitsofalgorithmicservice,thepaperwillclaimthatoursocietywillhavetofindabalancebetweenthebenefitsofusingbigdataandthedisturbingeffectsitmayposeforsociety(e.g.abusethroughdatafishing,lossandtheftofpersonaldata,etc.).Itwillpresentthepitfallsofrelianceonbigdata

17

predictionsusedbylawenforcementandcriminaljusticeagenciesandtherisksbigdatacarriesasregardsencroachmentonfundamentalliberties.

Anonymisationofjudicialdecisionswithmachinelearning

MatejKovačič,AljažKošmerljJozefStefanInstitute

SlovenianConstitutiondeterminesthatcourtproceedingsarepublic.Thismeansthatcourthearings(exceptwhentherearesomespecialreasons,forinstanceinvolvedminors,governmentsecrets,etc.)shallbepublic,andjudgmentsshallbepronouncedpublicly.Thereforepublichastherighttoknowthedecisionsofjudiciarybranchofpower.However,publishingcourtdecisionsisalsobelievedtocreateapushtowardsunificationofjurisprudence.

ThesearemainreasonswhySlovenianministryofjusticewantstopublishallcourtdecisionsontheInternet.However,SlovenianConstitutionalsoprotectspersonaldata,socourtdecisionsshouldbepublishedontheInternetinanonymousform.

Beforepublicrelease,allpersonaldataorotherdatafromwhichpersonsinvolvedintrialcouldbeidentified,shouldberemovedfromcourtdecision

InapresentationwewillpresentatoolTacita,whichhelpsinthisanonymisationprocess.ToolwasdevelopedatJožefStefanInstituteandusesmachinelearningtopredictwhichpartofacourtdecisionshouldberemoved(anonymised)withahighprobability.Tacitaisnotworkingcompletelyautomatic,buthelpsinotherwisetime-consumingmanualprocessofanonymisation.Wewillalsoshowhowthetoolhasbeendevelopedandwhichtoolsforanalyzingnaturallanguagehasbeenused.

AutomatedCybercrimeInvestigations:Theexampleof“Sweetie2.0”GregorUrbas

UniversityofCanberra

Dutchnon-governmentorganisationTerredesHommesin2013identifiedoverathousandpredatorsseekingtoengageinWebcamChildSexTourismfromsome65countriesoveraperiodofabout10weeks.Thesewereamong20,000requestsdirectedtoafictitious10-year-oldFilipinagirl,reallya3-Davatarcalled“Sweetie”,operatedbyateamofTerredesHommesresearchers.Numerousreferralstopoliceandprosecutionsfollowed,thefirstresultingconvictionbeingthatofanAustraliancitizenin2014.Amoresophisticatedandautomatedversionofthevirtualgirl,“Sweetie2.0”,nowoperatesindependentlyasachatbotwithenhanceddetectionfunctionalitytorecogniseindecentonlinebehaviourandchatcharacteristicsassociatedwithindividuals,whichcanbestoredandanalysedformatchingwithchatrecordsheldorobtainedbylawenforcementorthirdparties.Thesedevelopmentsillustratetheexpandingscopeforautomateddetectionofcybercrime,includingonlinechildexploitationthatmightbeanimportantelementoffuturepolicing.However,mostlegalsystemsarenotyetreadyforautomatedsurveillancedevicessuchas“Sweetie”tobeusedbylawenforcement,withopenquestionsaboutthelegalityoftheiruseandtheadmissibilityofevidencetherebyobtained.Thepresentationdiscussesthefindingsofthe2016reportentitled‘LegalAspectsofSweetie2.0’commissionedbyTerredesHommescomparingthelawsofnearlytwentycountries,againstthesubstantiveandproceduralframeworksoftheirdomesticlegalsystemsaswellaskeyinternationalagreementssuchastheCouncilofEurope’sConventiononCybercrimeandtheLanzaroteConvention.

18

BigData–BigIgnorance

RenataSaleclInstituteofCriminologyattheFacultyofLaw

Intoday'ssociety,peoplearemonitoringandcollectingdatarelatedtothemselves.Aspeoplewiththehelpofvariousapplicationsdutifullyrecordtheirdailylives,theyallowcompaniestousetheirdataformarketingandsurveillancepurposes.Thepaperfirstlooksatthepsychologicalmechanismsthatarebehindthedesireforself-monitoring.Second,itlooksatthewaycorporationsexploitthesedesires.Andthird,itaddressesthequestionofwhypeopleoftenignorethefactthatdatathatiscollectedabouttheirlivescaneasilybeusedtotheirdisadvantage.

BigDataandEconomicCyberEspionage:anInternationalLawPerspectiveMarušaT.Veber


ThevalueandpowerofeconomicbigdataisincreasinglybeingrecognisedasanimportantassetofStatesintheirendeavoursatthecompetitiveandglobalisedeconomicmarkets.Againstthisbackgroundvariousmethodstogathermassiveamountsofsecret,publiclyunavailableeconomicinformationofthirdStatesarebeingused.Inthisrespect,cyberspacehasbecomeanultimatetoolenablingrelativelyeasy,sophisticatedandquickaccesstolargeamountsofconfidentialinformation,essentialfortheperformanceandoperationofbusinessesandeconomicstabilityofStates.ThispresentationwillfocusoneconomiccyberespionageamongStatesandassessesthelegalityofsuchactivitiesunderinternationallaw.Itwillprovideageneraloverviewofthreerelevantinternationallegalframeworksgoverningeconomiccyberespionage:bilateralagreementsbetweenStates,generalinternationallawrulesonnon-interventionandtradepolicytools.ItwillarguethateconomicallymotivatedcyberespionageactivitiesbyStatesandtheirstatusunderinternationallawshouldbedifferentiatedfromotherformsoftraditionalespionageconductedformilitary,strategicandsecurityreasons.Whilethelegalityoftraditionalespionageactivitiesattheinternationallevelremainuncertain,wearewitnessingimportantlegaldevelopmentsintheareaofeconomiccyberespionage.

BigDatainCriminalJustice–FewChancesandSeriousRisksUweEwald

Ruhr-UniversitätBochuminGermany

StartingfromtheFoucauldianconceptofthe“regimeoftruth”incriminaljusticethispaperwillpresentfindingsofacasestudyanalyzingacomplexorganizedcrimecaseinGermanywerehugeamountsofdigitaldatahavebeenintroducedintoevidence.AsfindingsshowBigDataEvidence(BDE)areabouttoalterthetraditionalwayprofessionalsinlawenforcementandcriminaljusticeactintheevidentiaryprocess.

First,somelightwillbeshedontheBDEchallengesfortheinvestigationandanalysisofseriouscriminalcasesandpossibleshortcomingsoftrainingandpracticeofcrimeanalystsin,e.g.,Computer-AidedQualitativeDataAnalysis(CAQDAS)toreliablyassesstheprobativevalue.

Second,thenewsituationforlawyersattrialwillbeconsidered.Mostcurrentlawyers(inGermany)haveablindspotwhenitcomestoempiricalanalysisofdigitalevidentiarymassdataretrievedfromICT-devicesorcollectedbymeansofelectronicsurveillance.Thereisinparticularnoclearunderstandingregardingthewayhowinformationisproducedfromthesedigitaldata,eventuallyformingevidentiaryknowledgeandneededtoapplysubstantivelawinacrediblemanner.

19

Third,seriousriskswillbediscussedwhichariseinlightofBDEfromthemismatchofcriminalproceduralframeworksandpracticalrequirementsintheanalysisbylegalexperts.Moreover,BDEtendstocreatewhatdatasciencecalls“ambientintelligence”whichjeopardizesbasicprinciplesofmoderncriminallawsuchas“presumptionofinnocence”,“equalityofarms”or“publictrial”–ifnothandledproperlyatthelevelsoflegaleducation,judicialpracticeandlaw-making.

Finally,somesuggestionsshouldbeofferedonhowtoconceptualizetruth-findingandBDEandhowtolimittherisksforafundamentalhumanrightsandruleoflawcenteredapproachincriminaljustice.

BigData,DataProtectionandCitizenEmpowerment:TheRevivalofIndividualParticipationPrincipleasaResponsetoNewTechnologicalChallenges

WenlongLiTheUniversityofEdinburgh

Theindividual’sparticipationinprotectingpersonaldatawasgreatlyrespectedandconsideredamajorprinciplewhilemoderndataprotectionrulesweretakingshapeinthe1980s.Duringthefollowingdecades,however,theprinciplehasbeenlargelyunderutilisedforthereasonthatindividualsoftentimesfinditdifficulttogetinvolvedinsuchundertaking.Thishasbeenfurtherdeterioratedwhenbigdataanalyticsformulateanunpredictabledatadynamicthatcreatesawiderangeofeconomic,cognitiveandoperationalobstaclesforindividualstostayrelevant.

Thispaperattemptstoexaminetowhatextentcandataprotectionlawaccommodateandachievetheideaof‘citizenempowerment’andfocusesontheroleofanindividualinminimisingtherisksandharmsofbigdataanalytics.ItprincipallylooksatthelegislativeeffortsintheEUreformofdataprotectionlaw,asidefromtheemergenceofdecentralisedtechnologiesthatassistindividualsinfullycontrollingtheirpersonaldata.

Thepaperbeginsbytracingbacktothefoundationofdataprotectionlaw–theOCEDPrivacyFramework.Ittakestheindividualparticipationprincipleitcreatesasanentrypointandexaminesitscompatibilitywiththeideaofcitizenempowerment.Particularly,thepaperarguestheimportanceofindividualchecksamongamajorityofpaternalisticandcorporate-centricrulesandexploresthelegalbasisforachievingcitizenempowermentanduser-centricrulesinthecontextofdataprotection.Further,itexaminestheflexibilityofindividualparticipationprincipleintheeraofbigdataandlooksattheEuropeanapproachtousercontrol,takingthenewlycreatedrighttodataportabilityasacasestudy.Notably,thisrightisconsideredacriticalsteptoformulateanewdynamicfeaturing‘individualcentricity’,thusenablingindividualstotakeadvantageofpersonaldatafortheirowngoodandultimatelysharetheenormousbenefitsofbigdata.

BigData,PsychodiagnosticsandThreatstoPersonalAutonomyFriderikKlampfer,BojanMusil,NenadČušBabičandDomenBajde

UniversityofMaribor

Expertsandinstitutionshavewarnedofthethreatthatbigdataanalysisposestoourrighttoprivacy,thechallengeitraisestoourtraditionalnotionsofcriminalresponsibilityandjustice,aswellasconcernsabouttherisinglevelsofinvisibleandunaccountablesocialcontrol(EDPS2015).Andyet,surprisinglylittlehasbeenwrittensofaraboutitsdamagingpotentialforourpersonalautonomyasconsumersandcitizens.Thisisevenmoresurprisinggiventhepsychodiagnosticresearchthathasbeenconductedanddevelopedinrecentyears(Kosinskietal2013,Youyouetal2015,Parketal2015,Musiletal2017),whichisalsobeingaggressivelymarketedto,andusedby,economicandpoliticalstakeholdersaswellaspoliticalpartiesandorganizations,asapowerfultoolofnon-rationalpersuasion.

20

Inthepaper,wefirstprovideanoverviewandanassessmentofthosepsychodiagnosticandpsychoprognosticcomputingtoolsthatarecurrentlymakingheadlines.Wetrytodispelthefogofself-promotionandspintoseeitsreal,notmerelyimaginedorhyped-up,diagnosticpotential.Howaccurateare“psychograms”basedonananalysisofpeople’sseeminglyinnocuousonlineactivities?Isthereanysubstancetotheclaimthatcomputeralgorithmscanknowusbetterthanweknowourselves?Next,weassesstheboldpromisesthattheknowledgeofavarietyofpsycho-socialfactsaboutindividualusersofICTenablesustomatcheveryparticularmessagetoaparticularaddressee’semotions,needs,andpreferencestoanextentthatwasunimaginableadecadeago.Canwereally,bymeansofthisnewtechnology,manipulatepeople’sminds,choicesandbehaviormuchmoreefficientlythaneverbefore?Andwhatimplicationsdoesthishaveforourself-understandingasrationalandautonomousbeings,nottomentiontheelevatedmoralstandingthatcomeswithit?

Manipulationisoneofthemostfamiliarbutalsoincreasinglycommonthreatstopersonalautonomy,whichinturniswidelyconsideredasworthyof,andevencommanding,(almost)unconditionalrespect.Accordingly,everychargeofmanipulationneedstobetakenseriouslyfromthemoralpointofview.Butdoestargeted,individualizedcommercialandpoliticalonlineadvertisingamounttovicious,morallyproblematicmanipulationatall?Inordertoanswerthis,weprovideatentativedefinitionofmanipulative,asopposedtonon-manipulative,attitudinalandbehavioralinfluence.WethenshowtargetedadvertisingexploitativeofInternetusers’identifiedcognitiveshortcomingsandemotionalvulnerabilitiesmanipulative.Welamentthecommercializationofpoliticsandofferanexplanationofwhatrendersmanipulationofcitizens’choicesparticularlyproblematic,evencomparedtodailytamperingwithourconsumeristchoices.

Finally,forthepurposeofpolicyrecommendations,weenvisionthreefuturescenarios:(a)pessimistic,(b)optimistic,and(c)balanced,arguingthatwhileself-regulationandanopt-outoptionofdatasharingmaybesufficientforthesecondandthethird,theonsetofthefirstwouldrequirethepassingofrestrictivedata-protectionlegislationifwearetopreserveourcoredemocraticvaluesandinstitutions.

Bighealthdataonsocialnetworkingplatforms:Thelegalandethicalquestions

MariaTzanouKeeleUniversity

Thiscontributionseekstoexplorethelegalandethicalquestionsthatarisefromtheuseofpersonalhealthdatainonlinesocialmedia.Healthdata,whichreferstoinformationconcerninganindividual’shealthordisabilitycanbeexchangedinanumberofdifferentwaysinsocialmedia:i)throughspecifichealth-relatednetworkingplatforms,suchasPatientslikeme;ii)throughgeneralnetworkingplatforms,suchasFacebookandTwitter;and,iii)throughhealthandfitnessapplications,suchaswearabledevices,whichcollectdataaboutthebodilyfunctioning,includingeating,sleeping,andotheractivityhabitsoftheindividualandcanbeintegratedwithsocialmediaandsharethisinformationinordertoshowcasetheuser’spersonalperformancestatistics.Sharingofhealthdatainsocialmediaraisesmajorethicalandlegalquestionsrelatingtoprivacy,dataprotectionandpersonalautonomyanddignityaswellastheissueofthesurveillanceofdigitalcommunities.ThepresentcontributionaimstoinvestigatethesechallengesandcriticallyevaluatethepossibilitiesofthecurrentlyavailablelegalandregulatoryframeworksattheEUandtheinternationalleveltoeffectivelyprotectbighealthdatafromthewidespreadsurveillanceandmonitoringofonlinecommunitiesbybothgovernmentauthorities(inordertofightterrorismandseriouscrime)andtheprivatesector(privateinsurancecompanies,companiesofferinghealthproductsorservices,marketingandadvertisingcompanies).

21

Cross-borderexchangeofbigdata-innovativetechnologymeetsoutdatedlegalframework

StanislawToszaUniversityofLiège

Inordertoeffectivelyinvestigateandprosecutecriminaloffences,lawenforcementmusthaveaccesstodigitaldata,whichismostlyinpossessionofInternetserviceproviders,oftenlocatedabroad.Thelawofcriminalprocedureallowstheauthoritiestoaccessthisdata,whileprotectingsuspects’proceduralsafeguards.However,whentheserviceproviderislocatedinanothercountryorthedataisstoredabroad,lawenforcementshouldinprincipleresorttomutuallegalassistance(MLA)becausetheircoercivepowersarelimitedtotheirnationalterritory.

MLAprocedureiscumbersomeandlengthy.Inviewofitsdeficiencies,authoritieshaveatendencytocircumventMLArulesinpractice.Forinstance,theyrequestdatadirectlyfromtheserviceprovidersorconductdigitalsearchesincomputerssystemslocatedabroad(e.g.bymeansofTrojanhorses).Thelatteroptionisquestionableasitconsistsinaunilateral,covertaccesstodataonforeignterritory.Thefirstmethodputsatrisktherightsofthepersonsaffected.Furthermore,ifaserviceproviderrefusestocooperate,theproblemarisesastohowtoenforcethecooperationrequest.

Thisconundrumbecomesevenmorecomplexbecauseoftheuseofcloudservicesorencryption.Itbecomesparticularlychallengingbythegrowingtendencyandneedtousebigdatabylawenforcement.Thelatterproblemhasnotbeencomprehensivelyaddressed.Thismaypresumablyfavourdirectcooperationwithserviceproviders.Yet,italsorequiresprotectionoftherightsofaffectedpersons.TheaimofthispaperistodemonstratehowthetechnologicaldevelopmentsandtheneedsoflawenforcementchallengetheexistinglegalframeworkandcriticallyanalysefromthatperspectivethesolutionscurrentlybeingdiscussedwithintheEUandtheUS.

DatabasesandDueProcesswithregardtoEuropeanCourtofHumanRights’Case-Law

BegümBulakUygunYeditepeUniversity

Securityconcernsareattheforefrontofdatastorage.Theincreasinguseofdatabasesinthecriminalprocedureraisesproblemsintermsofensuringtherespectandprotectionoffundamentalrights.Databasesareinwidespreaduseinthecriminaljusticefieldacrosstheworld.Theseinstrumentshaveundoubtedadvantages:databasescontributeconsiderablytotheinvestigationofthecrime,ensurerapidinterventionattheinvestigationlevel,andallowthepossibilityofmakinganinformationexchangebetweencountries.Ontheotherhand,theyhaveundoubtedlyanimpactonindividualprivacy.Theuseofthistypeofinvestigativetoolscreatesaneedforappropriateregulationfortheuseandstorageofthedatacollectedinordertosafeguardthedisseminationandaccesstopersonaldata.Whilsttheuseofsuchmeasuresbylawenforcementagenciesiscommon,masssurveillanceasopposedtotargetedsurveillanceconstitutesaninterferencewiththerighttoprivacyandtherightsofthedefencesuchasthepresumptionofinnocence.Inparticular,specificprotectionisneededtoensuretherightprotectionfortheindividual'sprivacy.Iftheenforcementofthecriminallawsrequiresthepreservationofpersonalinformationgreaterawarenessisneededofthethreattoprivacyimplicitintheaccumulationofvastamountsofpersonalinformationindatabanks.Clearly,ahighlevelofprotectionofthepersonaldataofindividualswouldensureeffectivejudicialco-operationincriminalmattersandpolicecooperation.

Furthertoananalysisofthelegalframeworkthatappliestotherelationshipbetweensurveillanceanddataprotection,thispaperwilltrytofigureouthowtoovercomethelimitsofprivacy.Whiledoingso,themainargumentwillnotbejustaquestionofbalancebetweendataprotectionandnationalsecurityassuch.Masssurveillanceentailsachallengetocoreprivacyprinciplesforhowpersonaldatamustbeprocessedinareasonable,correctandlegitimatemanner.Giventhatdataretentioninthefieldoftelecommunication

22

challengestheveryfoundationsoftheruleoflaw,thefocusisinsteadonalargerscalebeingtheimpactofthisconflictondueprocessrightsinademocraticsociety.

Thispapersuggestsananalysisoftherecentcase-lawoftheECtHRontheissue.Inparticular,theprivacychallengesassociatedwithsurveillance,primarilywithintherealmofthecriminaljusticedatabaseswillbehighlighted.Morespecifically,thispapersketchestheextenttowhichdataprotectionlawsinteractswiththecriminalprocedurallawinordertoevaluatetheeffectivenessofpoliceandjudicialcooperation.Whenassessingtheindividual’sprivacyintheareaofcriminallaw,theconcernmustbetheextenttowhichcriminalproceduresareconstrainedbyarespectforprivacy.Oneofthebasicissuesistheadmissibilityofevidencefromlawenforcement-relateddatabases.

Dispensablehumansandindispensablemachinesinthecontextofclassandsocialcontrol

ZoranKandučInstituteofCriminologyattheFacultyofLaw

Thepaperdealswiththeuse,orratherwiththeabuse,of(both“smart”and“stupid”)machinesasthemeanscontrolling(anddisciplining)workingclass(individualswhohavetoselltheirworkingpowertotheprivateorpublicmasterinordertogetthemoneytheyneedforliving),workersin(formalandinformal)workplaces,consumersandcitizens.Inparticular,weemphasizetheroleof“labour-saving”technology(astheresultofmodernscience)intheclassandimperialist(dubbedas“anti-terrorist”)war(infine,inthewaroftherichagainst“therestoftheworld”),i.e.inthedestructiveandirrationalcapitalisteconomy(functioningasgiganticanonymous“automaton”or,inMarx’swords,“automatedsubject”),anditsreproductionandtransformation.Obviously,machinescaneasilysubstitutehumans,becausetheyalreadyfunctionasquasiautomata,personificationsofspecificeconomiccategoriesandfollowingthedominanttypeofrationality(“algorithms”)imposedonthembythecapitalistsocialrelationshipsandstructures(existinginthemintheformofpersonaldispositions,attitudes,desires,beliefs,andaspirations).Yet,humans–workinginprivateenterprises(tyrannies)orrepressivestateapparatuses–areproblematicbecauseoftheir“alltoohuman”characteristics,notjustemotions,passionsorvices(e.g.“laziness”orevenallergytowork),butpotentialityoractualityofdisobedience,i.e.thepossibilityofsaying“No!”tothemastersoreventofightagainsttheminordertodestroytheireconomic,political,legal,andideological(orcultural)power.Machinesmayhavesomedeficienciesorimperfections,buttheyhaveonecrucialquality.Namely,theyarealwaysobedienttothemasters.Moreover,theyaretheincreasinglyimportantreasonforfearfulandshamefulobedience(orevengrotesqueconformism)offormallyandinformallyemployed“voluntaryslaves”(orrather“auto-mobiles”),manyofwhom,nevertheless,managetofindjustifiablealibisinjoysobtainedfromcommercialgoods,e.g.privatecars,TVsets,personalcomputers,mobilephones,orlegalandillegalpsycho-activesubstances.Ofcourse,thetechnology(eveninitsmostadvanced,“smart”or“intelligent”forms)isbynomeansinvincible.Andwhatismore,therich–asthelegal,butnotlegitimaterulersoftheworld–canbedefeatedevenmoreeasily.They,ofcourse,havealotofmoney(withwhichtheycanbuyhumans),butitisnotreallytheirs.Itisstolen,albeitlegally.Anditisorremainstheirsprimarilybecauseofthestateforceandomnipresenteconomicandlegalpropagandafulling“enoughpeopleenoughtime”.Sothemainproblemseemstobehumanstupidity,notasinborncharacteristic,butassociallyconstructedandpermanentlyreproduced.Isitinsuperable,sothatthereisreallyjustonealternative?

23

EconomicCyberEspionageandRegulationofBigDataTheftattheInternationalLevel

MašaKovičDineFacultyofLaw,UniversityofLjubljana

Manygovernmentsareresortingtosomesortofeconomiccyberespionage/exploitationforvariousreasons.WiththedevelopmentofInternettechnologies,ithasbecomeeasierandmoreinexpensivetocarryoutdatatheft.ThebenefitsofsuchtheftincludeimportantcompetitiveadvantagesontheglobalisedmarketbothforbenefitingcompaniesasforthesponsoringStates.Atthesametime,suchtheftcausesseriousdamagetothetargetedcompany,mostlyinthelossofprofitandalossofyearsofresearchanddevelopment.Asthetopicisarelativelynewissueininternationallaw,fewattemptsatregulationhavebeenmade.Mostlyduetothefactthatallstatesresorttosomesortofespionage.However,theconsequencesofthefailuretoregulateeconomiccyber-exploitationareserious,renderinganeedforitsregulationattheinternationallevel.Economiccyber-exploitationischaracteristicallysimilartopillageofnaturalresources.Thusthelawonprohibitionofpillagecouldprovideabasisfordesigningtheregulationoneconomiccyber-exploitationandprohibitsuchactivities.Theftistheft,howeveritiscarriedoutandwhatevertheinformationthatisstolen.Wheneconomiccyber-exploitationistakingplaceamongstates,aninternationalresponseisnecessary.

Findingtherightbalancebetweensecurityandprivacy:NATOandthebigdataanalysesMitkoBogdanoski,MetodiHadji-Janev

Militaryacademy“GeneralMihailoApostolski-Skopje”

DuringitslastChiefoftransformationconferenceheldinNorfolkin2016NATO’schiefsoftransformationhaverecognizedthatbigdataphenomenonhasbecomeoneofthemostpromisingandprevailingtechnologytopredictfuturetrends.BigdataanalysesmayenableNATOtoautomaticallyprocessandextractvaluableinsights,predictpatternsandenhancedecisionmaking.However,putinthecontextofNATO’scommitmenttorespectinternationallawbigdataanalysesraiseseriousconcernswithregardstotheindividualfreedomsingeneralandpersonaldataprotectioninmorespecificsense.

ThepaperwillbrieflyexplainhowbigdataanalyzesmayenhanceNATO’smissionaccomplishment.Itwillthenevaluatehowandwhyfindingtherightbalancebetweensecurityandindividualfreedoms(especiallypersonaldataprotection)areessentialforNATO’smissionaccomplishmentwhileemployingbigdataanalyses.

FiveReasonsNottoPersonifyAI

JoannaJ.BrysonUniversityofBathandCenterforInformationTechnologyPolicyatPrincetonUniversity

ArtificialIntelligenceisoftentreatedasanalienforceoranunruly,potentiallydangerouschild.Infact,AIisjustaspecialcaseofcomputationbeingcommodified,whichistosaythatthemeansbywhichAIischangingsocietyarenottrivial,butarelesstransparentthansimpleopposition.Intelligenceisthetriggeringofappropriateactionsinresponsetoperceivedevents.Informationtechnologyhasbeenallowinghumanstoenhanceourcapacitytodothisarguablyforthousandsofyears.Itallowsustobothrememberandperceivemorethanwecouldasindividuals,whichinturnallowsustoinnovateatcooperateinunprecedentedways,sometimesattheexpenseofeachother,othergroupsortherestoftheecosystem.

InthistalkIestablishaclear,science-based,functionalistdefinitionofintelligence,andartificialintelligence,demonstratingfromthisthatconcernsaboutartificialgeneralintelligenceandsuperintelligencearemisguided,thoughindifferentways.ThenIwilltalkabouteffortstoregulateAI,withafocusontheBritisheffortsgoingbacksixyearsnowwiththePrinciplesofRobotics.FinallyIwilladdresswhyweshouldnot

24

constructAItobelegalormoralagents–notbecausesuchconstructionisimpossible,butbecauseitisilladvisedandeasilyavoided,atleastforcommercialproducts.

HealthcareRobotsandtheRighttoPrivacy

TjašaZapušekUniversityofCopenhagen,FacultyofLaw

Thepaperrevealsauthor’spersonalconclusionsderivedfromthefactthatanincreasingautonomyofrobotsisnotasciencefiction,yetitpresentsanotoriousfeatureofmodernerathatrequiresacomprehensiveandsystematiclegalapproach.However,aEuropeanParliaments’recentlyissuedrecommendationtoconsiderrobotsaselectronicpersonsseemsinappropriatefromhumanrightsperspectiveandmayreflectinseriousviolationsoffundamentalrightsattachedtoallhumanbeings.Thisarticlefocusesonnegativeaftermathsofautomatonandtheimpacttheyhaveonhealthlawandtherighttoprivacy.Thefundamentalprincipleofhealthcareethics,aprotectionofpatient’sclinicalrecordspresentsacornerstoneofdoctor-patientconfidentialrelationship.Thelatteris,duetoitsimportance,protectednotonlybynationalhealthlegislations,yetalsobyArticle8oftheEuropeanConventiononHumanRights,Righttoprivacy.Amongthelatestmedicalachievementsistherevelationofthealternativetoapersoninawhitecoat,arobotthatcanperformthesurgerycompletelyonitsown,hasindividualsessionswithautisticpersonsetc.Asalreadymentioned,medicineisaprofessionthatrequiresacertainlevelofmaintenanceofsecrecyofconfidentialinformationandaccordingtothepreviousCourt’sdecisionsthesecrecyisevenmoreimportantincasesthatinvolvespsychiatricrecords.Therobots’involvementinmedicaltreatmentsononehandandeasyaccesstotheinformationtheygainduringthetreatmentontheother,bringintoquestiontheeffectivenessoftheprovisionsofArticle8oftheEuropeanConventiononHumanRights.Lawallowsindividuals,pledgedtosecrecytobypasstheprovisionsofArticle8(2)oftheECHR.Thementionedparagraphstates,thatanydisclosuremustbeinaccordancewiththelawandhavelegitimatepurpose,moreoverithastobeproportionateinaccordancewiththelawandnecessarypursuanttothedemocraticsociety.

Thepresenceofrobotdoctorsrisesmanyquestionssuchas,whatkindofconsequenceswillhavethedisclosurebyrobotdoctors?Doesitmeanthatrobotsare/willbecapableofevaluatingtheimportanceofparticularinformationandthereforewillitpossessamoralsense?Or,willarobot,duetoitsmechanicalnaturebeusedasasimpletoolinordertogainsomeimportantinformationthathavebeensavedontheitsdisc?

Currentlegislationsincountriesaroundtheworlddonotputmuchattentiononthisparticulararea,eventhoughthemodernroboticapproacheshavealreadybeenintroducedandalsoverywellaccepted.

Hidinglargeamountsofdatainvirtualdiskimages

GašperFele-Žorž,AndrejBrodnik,FacultyofComputerandInformationScience,UniversityofLjubljana

Overthepastfewdecades,multiplemethodsforhidingdatainonharddriveshavebeendevised.Mostofthesedependonunallocatedspaceeitherbetweenorwithinfilesystems.

Sincemethodsforhidingdatamayalsobeusedbycriminals,theyareofinteresttodigitalforensicinvestigators.Toolsusedbyinvestigatorsthereforeusuallysupportfeatureswhichcanbeusedtoinspectdatawithinplaceswheredatamaybehidden,suchasdeletedfiles,unallocatedsectorsoralternatedatastreams.

Widelyavailablevirtualizationofandonpersonalcomputerscanbeusedtosupportoldsoftwarewhichmightotherwisenotrunonmodernhardware.Virtualizationisalsoessentialindevelopinglow-levelsoftware,such

25

asoperatingsystems,andisanessentialcomponentofallsolutionsforcloudcomputing.Virtualizationtechnologiesarethereforewidelyusedandwilllikelyremainpopularintheforeseeablefuture.Withvirtualcomputersitisoftenmoreconvenienttousefilesasvirtualharddrivesinsteadofphysicaldisks.Thesefilesaretypicallylarge,sodatacouldpotentiallybehiddenwithinthem,dependingonthevirtualdiskimageformat.

Wehaveanalyzedthemostpopularvirtualdiskimagefileformatsanddevisedthreegeneralapproachesforhidingdatawithinsuchfiles.Twooftheseapproachesallowlargeamountsofdatatobehidden.Thehiddendataisunlikelytobedetectedbycurrentdigitalforensicstools.Newtechniquesandprocedureswillhavetobedevelopedtodetectsuchdata.

Wehaveimplementedoneoftheapproacheswhichcanbeusedtostorepracticallyunlimitedamountsofdatainalibrarywhichisfreelyavailable.

HowAretheAustralianMetadataLawsAffectingtheAverageSocialMediaUser?CarolinaAre

UniversityofSydney

ThispaperanalysestheincreasedsurveillancetheAustralianpopulationhasexperiencedaftertheterroristattacksof9/11.ExaminingtheTelecommunications(InterceptionandAccess)Amendment(DataRetention)Act2015No.39,2015,alsoknownas‘metadatalaws’,thisresearchattemptstoidentifythereasonsbehindthisincreasedsurveillanceintheeraofIslamicState(ISIS)’sthoroughuseofsocialmediaplatformstoinciteandrecruitnewterrorists(Klausen2015;SternandBerger2015).ExaminingthenecessityandproportionalityofthelawsinaccordancewiththeUnitedNations’(UN)UniversalDeclarationofHumanRights(UDHR)(UN1948),thispapersetsouttoestablishhowtheaveragesocialmediasavvycitizenislikelytobeaffectedbythisrestrictiveandconservativeturnintheAustraliancriminaljusticeandanti-terrorismlandscape.Itisexpectedthatcrackingdownonaveragesocialnetworkusersinordertospotandpunishterroristorganisationsandtheirunlawfuluseoftheinternetandsocialmediaislikelytoproducemixed,ifnotunsuccessful,results.

Howdopublicsectorvaluesgetintopublicsectormachinelearningsystems,ifatall?

MichaelVealeUniversityCollegeLondon

Moremachinelearningalgorithm–powereddecision-supportsystemsarepilotedanddeployedinthepublicsectoreachdaytohelpdetectindividualsandcorporatewrongdoinginareassuchastaxation,childprotectionandpolicing.Whilesomewelcomethistrendasthedawnofmoreevidence-basedadministrativedecision-making,othersworrythattheopacityandperceivedobjectivityofsuchsystemsusherinunwantedbiasesthroughthebackdoorjustastheykickdueprocessout.

Studiesofthesesystemshaveprimarilyattemptedtolook-inorreverse-engineerthemfromtheoutside,missingthepeoplethatobtain,deployandmanagethesetechnologieswithindiverseinstitutionalcontexts.Tohelpfillthisgap,25publicservantsandtechnologistsfromdifferentsectorsandcountriesinvolvedinpublicsectormachinelearningprojectswereidentifiedandinterviewed.Theywereaskedabouttheirexperienceswiththesetechnologies,focussingonhowtheyunderstoodandapproachedoperationalbarriersandethicalissuestheyencountered.Analysisoftheseinterviewsshowspromisingrolesforrecenttechnologicalapproachestoresponsibilityinthisfieldsuchas‘fairness-aware’orinterpretablemachinelearningsystems.Yettheseinterviewsalsoraisequestionsandissuesthatarebothcurrentlyunderemphasisedandunlikelytoberesolvedbytechnicalsolutionsalone.Thisresearchsuggeststhatgovernancemechanismsforapplied

26

machine-learningmustbemoresensitivetoon-the-groundpressuresandcontextsiftheyaretosucceedinensuringnewdata-drivendecision-supportsystemsaresocietallybeneficial.

Individualcontroloverpersonaldatainthedata-driveneconomy

HelenaUršičCenterforLawandDigitalTechnologies,LeidenLawSchool

Controloverpersonaldataprocessingisanintegralpartofthefundamentalrighttopersonaldataprotection.Intheeraofbigdataandgrowingdigitaleconomy,datasubjectcontrolrightssuchastherighttoerasureandtherighttoaccessfaceimportantchallenges.Itisdisputablewhethernewcircumstancesstillallowformeaningfulcontroloverpersonaldataprocessing.Toanswerthisquestion,thecontributionathandexamineslegalframeworkforcommercialdatauseandreuse,payingspecialregardtotheprovisionsonindividualrights.Drawingonthisanalysis,itwillbeshownhowthemeaningofindividualrightsandtheirimplicationshavebeenchanginginthelightofbigdata.

Judicialoversightof(mass)collectingandprocessingofpersonaldataPrimožGorkič


Thepaperexploresdifferentapproachestosecuringjudicialoversightofcollectingandprocessingofpersonaldatainacriminaljusticesystem.ItfocusesontrafficcommunicationandDNAdata.Abriefcomparativeoverviewshowthattheneedtoestablishjudicialoversightverymuchcorrespondstothemannertherighttoprivacyisconceptualisedwithinaspecificjurisdiction.Ononeside,theUSreliesheavilyontheconceptofreasonableexpectationofprivacy(privacyassecrecy,Solove).Ontheotherside,Europeanjurisdictions-althoughnotuniformly-viewprivacyprotectionasanintegralpartofprotectingone'spersonhoodanddignity.ThepaperexplorestheclashofthetwocompetingconceptionswithinUSjurisdictions,particularlyaftertheSnowdenrevelations.Ingeneral,therecognitionoftheneedtoprovidejudicialoversightisgreaterinjurisdictionsthatviewprivacyinthecontextofprotectingone'spersonhood.Inthissense,thelevelofproceduralsafeguardsverymuchcorrespondstothesubstantiveunderstandingoftherighttoprivacy.

LimitsofthecurrentstateofArtificialIntelligenceforLawMarkoGrobelnikJozefStefanInstitute

ArtificialIntelligence(AI),despiteitsrecentsuccessesonseveralfronts,hasstillseriouslimitationswhenitcomestotheproblemsrelatedtothedeepunderstandingtheworld.Lawisanarea,wheremostlyshallowAIprobabilisticsolutionsarenotuseful.Asaconsequence,manyofthestandardroutines,wherehumansareperformingwell,arestillnotsolvablewiththecurrentAItechniquesandsystems.InthepresentationwewilltouchwhatarethelimitsofthecurrentAIandwhatisthereasonforthem.RecentsuccessesandpopularityofAIisoftenraisingexpectationswhattechnologycoulddo–inreality,manyofthe“impressive”technologicalsolutionsarebasedonshalloweffectswhichmachinelearning(asakeytoday’sAItechnology)cancapturefromthebigdata.Butthereisaseriousproblemonhowtheworldandthecontextisperceivedbythetechnology.WewillpresentathinlinebetweenwhatAItechnologycandoandwhatcannotdobasedoncurrentdevelopmentsandwherethislinecanmoveonthefutureandhowthelawcanbenefitoutofit.

27

Livinglabsandbigdatainpractice:Stratumseind2.0-AdiscussionofalivinglabintheNetherlandsMasaGalic

TilburgInstituteforLaw,TechnologyandSociety(TilburgUniversity)

Livinglabprojectsarebecomingcommonpracticein(smart)citiesaroundtheworld.Theyrepresentaplatformandmethodologyfortechnologytestingandexperimentation,whichreliesonbigdataanalysisandincreasinglyshapeslifeinthecity.Asarelativelyrecentphenomenon,however,theyareunderresearched,lackingawidelyrecogniseddefinitionandtheoreticalframework.Theproliferationandgrowingimportanceofsuchurbantechnologicalprojectsdemandsamorethoroughanalysisanddisentanglementofthepracticeandtheconcept.Inordertoaddressthisneed,thispaperfirstpresentsalivinglabinpractice–theStratumseindLivingLab(partoftheStratumseind2.0project)inEindhoven,theNetherlands.TheStratumseindLivingLab,asmallerprojectinamiddle-sizedandupcomingEuropeancity,whichincludeslocalandglobaltechnologycompanies,servesasanillustrativeexampleofaEuropeanlivinglab,itsoperationanditspromises.ThesecondpartofthispaperexaminesacademicliteratureonlivinglabsandbrieflyanalyzestheoperationoftheStratumseindLivingLabprojectinviewofitspromises,particularlythosepertainingtotheideologicalrhetoricofbigdata.Basedontheexaminationoftheoryandthepracticalexample,thepaperconcludesthatsuchtechnologicalprojectscarrywiththemawiderangeofsocial,political,ethicalandlegalconcerns,whichthepartiesoftheStratumseindLivingLabprojectdonotengagewithseriouslyenough.Thepaceofdevelopmentandrolloutoflivinglab(andsmartcity)technologiesinEindhovenandbeyondisproceedingwellaheadofwiderreflection,critiqueandregulation.Suchactivityisfoolishanddangerousanddoesnotleadtogreatereffectivenessandlegitimacyofthevision.

NATO’sNewChallenge:Synchronizing“Dots”,“Bullets”and“Skills”

MitkoBogdanoskiandMetodiHadji-JanevMilitaryacademy“GeneralMihailoApostolski-Skopje”

Employingcyberspacetoachievestrategicendsviaahybridmodeofthewarfarestateandnon-stateactorsthreatenNATOlikeneverbefore.Understandingtheevolvingcomplexthreatenvironmenton14June2016,NATO’sdefenseministersagreedtorecognizecyberspaceasadomainattheupcomingWarsawSummit.DuringtheWarsawSummitasanadditiontotheexistingoperationaldomainsofair,seaandland,cyberspacewasofficiallyrecognizedasanewoperationaldomain.AlthoughthisdecisiondoesnotchangeNATO’smissionormandateitrequiressignificantdiplomatic,economic,operationalandinformationaleffortstosynchronizethe“dots”,“bullets”and“skills”.Therearethreereasonsforthis.First,notallNATOmembers,nottospeakpartnernations,havethesamecybercapacities.Second,relatedtoformer,notallmemberstateshavethesameperceptionwhenitcomestocyberthreats.Thirdreasonstemsfromtheoperationalneed.

ThearticlewillfirstexplainthesecuritythreatlandscapethatNATOisfacingfromcyberspaceandwillprovideevidenceswhyNATOandpartnernationsneedtoconsidercyberthreatsasaseriousnationalsecuritythreat.Then,usingthecomplexsystemanalysisthearticlewillexplainthereasonsstrategic,legalandtechnicalpointofviewforthemainargumenti.e.tosynchronizethe“dots”,“bullets”and“skills”.Particularly,thearticlewillanalyzetheimportanceofbuildingcyberdefensecapacitiesamongthepartnernations.FinallythearticlewillprovidesomerecommendationthatneedtobeconsideredbyNATOandpartnernations.

28

Personaldataforcommongood:howtoprofitfromBigDatasustainably

NadyaPurtovaTilburgInstituteforLaw,Technology,andSociety,TilburgUniversity

ThepromisesofBigDataAnalyticsaregrandandtempting.Accesstothelargepoolsofdata,muchofwhichispersonal,issaidtobevitaliftheBigDatainitiativesaretosucceed.Theresultingrhetoricisofdatasharing.Thistalkexposes‘theotherside’ofdatasharingwhichoftenremainsinthedarkwhentheInformationIndustryandresearchersadvocateformorerelaxedrulesofdataaccessanduse:namely,thetalkframestheissueofpersonaldatauseintermsofthecommons,aresourcesharedbyagroupofappropriatorsandthereforesubjecttosocialdilemmasthathavetobeaddressediftheresourceuseistobesustainable.Thetalkwillarguethattheuncontrolleduseofthedatacommonswillultimatelyresultinanumberofthecommonsproblems,andelaboratesonthetwoproblemsinparticular:disempowermentoftheindividualvis-à-vistheInformationIndustry,andtheenclosureofdatabyafewInformationIndustryactors.

PersonalDataProtectioninSocialSciencesinBigDataEra

JanezŠtebe,SonjaBezjak,IrenaBolkoandAnaSlavecArhivdružboslovnihpodatkov

Thedevelopmentofdigitaltechnologiesfostersnewtypesofdata,researchapproachesandmethodologiesaswellassignificantlyincreasedtheamountofdatainterestingforsocialsciences.However,italsoraisesseverelegal,ethicalandqualityissues.TheSocialScienceDataArchivesattheUniversityofLjubljana(Arhivdružboslovnihpodatkov-ADP)isinvolvedintheSERISS(SynergiesforEurope’sresearchInfrastructureintheSocialSciences),internationalprojectthatconnectsleadingEuropeanresearchinfrastructures.InoneofthetaskstheADPtogetherwithprojectpartnersconductedtheliteraturereviewonhowsocialmediadata(Twitter,Facebook,Snapchat,etc.)isalreadyusedinsocialscientificresearchandhowlegalandethicalchallengesarediscussedinthefield.Basedon20yearsofexperienceindatacurationandpreservationweidentifiedquestionsrelatedtodifferentphasesoftheresearchdatalifecycle.Sincesocialmediadataisnotcreatedforresearchpurposes,oneofthemainissuesisobtainingparticipants’informedconsenttoreusedata.Consentisnolongerrequestedonlybyresearchethicscommittees,butitwillbecomearequirementwiththeimplementationofthenewGDPR.Althoughsocialmediadataisoftenpubliclyavailable,researchersdon’thaveanexplicitinformedconsenttocollectandanalysetheirdatanorthatcantheylinkitwithothersourcesorreuseitbeyondtheoriginalpurposeofdatacollection.Asadataarchive,ADPisparticularlyinterestedinfindingalegalsolutionfordatatobestored,curatedanddisseminatedinthelongterm.Severalquestionsarise,fromdeterminingdataownershiptotimelimitsfordatastorageanddocumentation,aswellastoenableresearcherstolinkdatafromdifferentprovenance(e.g.officialstatistics,socialmediadata,historicalandhealthdata).Theresearchcommunityneedstorecognisethegapbetweenresearchinterestsandlawsandethicspolicies,andfindabalancebetweenresearchfreedomandtheprotectionofrespondents.

Pricing(big)data:therighttoknowthevalueofourownpersonaldata

GianclaudioMalgieriVrijeUniversiteitBrussel-LSTSresearchgroup

ThecommodificationofdigitalidentitiesisanemergingrealityinourBigDataera:personaldataofindividualshavehighvalueinthedata-driveneconomyandareoftenconsideredacounterperformancefor“free”digitalservicesorfor“discounts”ininsurances.Aneffortthatcanincreaseawarenessandcontrollershipofconsumers/usersontheirownpersonalinformationcouldbemakingthemawareofthe“price”oftheirpersonaldata,sothattheycanacquirehigherawarenessabouttheirpowerinthedigitalmarket.

29

Inordertofindobjectiveparametersforquantifyingdata,weproposetocombinetwomethods:a)atop-downapproach(thepriceofpersonaldata“demand”),i.e.thepricethatcompaniesgenerallypayforpersonaldataofindividuals(turnoverfromonlineads);andab)bottom-upapproach(thepriceofpersonaldatasupply),basedona“reverseliability”paradigm,i.e.measuringthe“value”ofpersonaldataintermsofdamagetoprivacyor“lossofprivacy”andalsointermsofincreaseofconsumerasymmetry.

Secondly,itisnecessarytofindhowthis“pricing”ofpersonaldatacanbeintroducedinthedigitalmarket.Weproposetoaddanewspecificdutyofinformationatarticle13oftheEUGeneralDataProtectionRegulation:ineachdataprocessingwherethevalueofcustomers’personaldataisrelevantfortheeconomictransaction,thepriceofthesedata(calculatedonobjectiveparameters)shouldbecommunicatedtotheconsumer.

Actually,personaldatadonothavethesamevalueforeachindividual.Subjectshavingalowerpropensitytoconsumeandpresumablylowerincomeshaveless“valuable”datathanotherconsumersandcouldhaveworsecontractualconditions.

Accordingly,inordertoavoiddiscriminationbasedonthevalueofpersonaldata,weproposetoincludethepropensitytoconsumeandtheeconomicconditionsofdatasubjectswithinthe“specialcategoriesofdata”atArt.9GDPR.

ProtectingIndividualRightsWithBasicToolsintheHigh-TechEra

SorinaIoanaDorogaWestUniversityofTimisoara

Intheeraofever-expandingdigitalmarketsandsurprisingadvancementsintechnology,itishardlysurprisingthatlawseems,attimes,unabletokeepup.Withtheincreasinguseofbigdatainalargenumberofsectors–bothintheprivate,aswellasinthegovernmentalsphere–mosttransactionsandoperationstakeplaceintheabsenceoftheconcernedindividualswhosedataisactuallybeingcollectedandprocessed.Thisraisesissuesrelatingnotonlytotheinsufficiency(orrather,inadequacy)ofbigdataregulation,butalsototheeffectivenessofexistingmechanismsoflegalprotectionfordatasubjects.Thepresentpaperdealswithconcernsrelatingtotheprotectionofindividualrightsinthecontextofdataprocessing,bytacklingtheissuesofinformedconsent,aswellaseffectiveremediesavailabletodatasubjectsunderinternationalhumanrightsinstruments.WhileitisacknowledgedthatspecificrulesavailableatnationalandEUlevelmightproveattimestobeinsufficientlyprecise(orflexible,insomecases)soastooffereffectiveprotectionofrightssuchasprivacyorfreedomofexpressionofdatasubjects,weattempttolookbackatthecoreprinciplesunderhumanrightsinstruments,whichcouldbeemployedinordertocoverexistingregulatorygaps.Tothisend,acomparativeanalysisoftheEUandUScase-lawconcerningtheinteractionofbigdatawithprivacyandexpressionrightsprovidesausefultoolinidentifyingthelegalstandardsthatcouldhelpstrikeafairbalancebetweenthelegitimateinterestsintheuseofdataandtheprotectionofindividualfreedoms.ThespecificitiesoftheinterplaybetweentherighttoprivacyandthefreedomofexpressionintheEuropeanandUSlegalculturesalsocreateafertilegroundforidentifyingpotentialsolutionsforimprovingexistingdataregulations.

Reconfiguringfreedom:Bigdata,theInvestigatoryPowersAct2016andtheconstructionoflibertyintheUK’ssecuritystate.

LydiaMorganUniversityofBirmingham

TheUK’sInvestigatoryPowersAct2016putsanumberoftroublingpowersonstatutoryfootingandexpandsotheralreadyexistingpowersundertheguiseoflegislativerationalisation.Oneoftheprinciplesatitscoreisapreventativeratherthanpunitiveapproachterrorismandseriouscrimesupportedbytheideaofsecurityas

30

centraltothenationalinterest.Bigdataisgatheredbyandonbehalfofthestateandutilisedtomonitor,predictandprosecutepreparatoryactivities.Insodoing,avarietyofformsoffreedomarecurtailed.Thispaperexploresthewaysinwhichthisreconfigurestheideaoffreedominthe21stcentury,blendingapproachesfrompubliclawandpoliticaltheory.Itsuggestssecurityisnowprivilegedoverfreedomratherthanbeingsoughttopursueit.Thisunnecessarilyrestrictsevennegativelibertyandhaslittlerecognitionoftheimpactonautonomyandagency.

SlavetotheAlgo-rhythm?LegalandtechnologicalstickingpointsconcerningmachinelearningandtheGDPR

LilianEdwardsandMichaelVealeStrathclydeUniversity,UCL

Moremachinelearningalgorithm–poweredsystemsaredeployedeachdayinareasthatnowincludeemployment,policing,marketing,pricediscrimination,healthintervention,onlinenewscuration,taxfraudpredictionandchildprotection.Somewelcomethistrendofdata-drivendecision-makinganddecision-support,whileothersworrythattheopacityandperceivedobjectivityofsuchsystemsusherinunwantedbiasesthroughthebackdooratthesametimeastheykickdueprocessout.TheGDPRoffersarangeofrights—somenew,somesimplyrehashed—thatmanyhopewillhelpthemnavigatethisnewalgorithmicgovernancesocietyinthecourts.Yetasthispaperwilldiscuss,whenconsideringtheGDPRinthecontextofmachinelearningusingbothalegalandacomputersciencelenstheserightsdonotappearstraightforwardtounderstandorimplement.

Anallegednew“righttoanexplanation”(art13)—whichhasactuallyexistedinsimilarformintheDPDsince1995—hasbothlegalandtechnicalcaveats.Legally,therehasalwaysbeenacarveoutfromtherightfortheprotectionoftradesecretsandintellectualproperty,whichprobablyexplainsitslackofhistoricaluseintheEU.Recital63oftheGDPRdoeshowevernowcounselthatthisshouldnotjustify“arefusaltoprovideallinformationtothedatasubject”[emphasisadded].

Providing“meaningfulinformationaboutthelogic”ofadvancedmachinelearningmodelsisrarelytechnicallypossible.Themaintechniquesproposedtodaybycomputerscientiststoeffectively‘explain’neuralnetworks,theirinnardsblack-boxedeventotheirdesigners,wrapsimplermodelsoptimisedforanexplanationaroundmorecomplexonestoestimatecorelogics:so-called‘pedagogicalinterpretation’.Yetsuchsimplemodelsarejustthat—simple—thereforeoftenfailingto‘explain’thefringecasesthatarethemostlikelytoleadindividualstocallupontheirGDPRrights.

Therighttonotbesubjecttoalgorithmicdecision-making(art22)–againnotnewbutextendedfromanearlierrightintheDPD,art15–seemspromising,butisrepletewithexemptionsandonlyvalid(a)incasesofautomatedprocessingproducinglegalorsimilarsignificanteffectsand(b)wheretheeffectwassolelybasedonautomatedprocessing.Machinelearninginhigh-stakescontextsisalmostalwaysdeployedasdecision-supportratherthanpurelyautomateddecision-makingandtheGDPRlacksthenuancesnecessarytoestablishwhetherahumanwasseriously‘in-the-loop’.

Similarissuesarisearoundexistingrightstoa“righttodataportability”(art20),deletionand“tobeforgotten”(erasure,art17)withproblemsalsoforeseeablegiventheongoingdebateonwhenpersonaldataceasestobesobyvirtueofanonymization/pseudonymisation..Whatrightdoesadatasubjecthavetotheseinrespectofinferreddata?

Weconcludebyaskingifweareallcondemnedtobeslavestothealgo-rhythm?

31

Sloveniancriminalintelligenceactivityandprotectionofprivacy

SabinaZgagaConstitutionalCourtoftheRepublicofSlovenia

Recentlytendencycouldbenoticedthattheintelligencepowersofnotonlynationalintelligenceandsecurityagencies,butthatofregularpoliceshouldbeempowered,alsowithintenttogatherevidenceforsubsequentcriminalprosecution.ThistrendcouldberecognisedalsoinSlovenia.Itisconnectedtodatamining,sincethepoliceintelligenceactivityincludestheacquisition,assessmentandanalysisofpersonalandotherdataaboutcriminalactivityofnaturalandlegalpersonsandcriminalassociationsaccordingtopolicelegislation.Basedonthis,theprocessofdecision-makingandplanningofpoliceactivityregardingcrimeprevention,detectionandinvestigationshouldbemade.Inthisframework,thePolicecangatherinformationfromallpublicsourcesandwithcooperationofpersons,whovoluntarilygivethepoliceoperationalinformationaboutcriminalacts,perpetratorsandotherrelevantactivities.Thisincreasedpoliceintelligenceactivityofcourseopensupalsonumerouslegalissuesandquestion.FromtheviewpointofcompatibilityofwithCriminalProcedureActitisalsoofgreatsignificance,whenthisintelligenceactivitytransformsintocriminalprocedure,inwhichstrongerencroachmentsofprivacyareallowed,butinwhichalsothestatusofasuspectcarriescertainlegalprotection.Andlast,butnotleast;itisessential,whetherthepoliceisallowedtouseitsown-alreadyexisting-officialrecordsofpersonaldata,oreventheofficialrecordsofpersonaldata,keptbyotherstateauthorities,sincetheSlovenianpersonaldataprotectionisrelativelystrict.Thispaperthereforeexploresdatamining,conductedbythePoliceduringitsintelligencepoliceactivityinSlovenia,anditslegallimits.

Socialnetwork,socialprofiling,predictivepolicing.CurrentissuesandfutureperspectivesFedericoCostantini

UniversitàdegliStudidiUdine

Networkanalysisisapowerfultoolthatisincreasinglyusednotonlytodetermineeventsthatoccurredinthepast,butalsotopredictwhatmayhappeninthefuture.Thiscontributewilldiscusstheperspective,farfrombeingabstractorremote,thatsuchmethodsmaybeadoptedinordertoanticipatecrimes.Takingintoaccountcurrenttechnologies,presentlegalscienceandaccordingtotherecent“OnlifeManifesto”,herearetackledthreeissues,concerningrespectivelytheepistemological,thelegal-philosophicalandtheanthropologicalaspect.Inthefirstplace,therelevanceoftheinformationprovidedinacrime’s“prediction”,sinceitdoesnotconcernaneventofthepast.Secondly,thenatureofresponsibilityascribedonthesegrounds,asneitheran“actusreo”nora“mensrea”canbefoundinthecase.Finally,thekindofpunishmentcouldbegiventothesupposedcriminal,becausefreewillshouldbedoubtedifhisbehaviourcouldbeforeseen.

State’sDueDiligenceinCyberspaceintheEraofBigDataVasilkaSancin


DuediligenceunderinternationallawexplainswhataresponsibleStateoughttodoundernormalconditionsinasituationwithitsbestpracticableandavailablemeans,withaviewtofulfillingitsinternationalobligation,andthusreferstoalevelofjudgement,care,prudenceand,determinationthataStatewouldreasonablybeexpectedtoundertakeunderparticularcircumstances.TheauthoraimstodiscussStates'duediligenceincyberspaceintheeraofbigdatathroughthethree-foldobligationofStates:toprevent,toinvestigateandtoprosecutethoseresponsibleforcyberattacks.TheanalysisdelvesupontheparadigmshiftininterpretingState'ssovereigntyincyberspace.Someofthewell-establishedprinciplesincertainareasofinternationallaw,

32

suchasduediligenceininternationalenvironmentallawrelatingtopreventionoftransboundaryharm,areusedmutatismutandisasguidingprinciplesfortheapplicationofduediligenceincyberspace.Indiscussingthecontentsofduediligenceincyberspaceemphasisisgiventothedilemmassurroundingtheissuesofthresholdofemergingdamagefromtheattack,actualandconstructiveknowledgeofthestateandpossiblemeasuresthataStatecantakeinresponsetoacyberattack.

Thealluringpromiseofobjectivity:BigdataincriminaljusticeMojcaPlesničar

InstituteofCriminologyattheFacultyofLaw

Criminaljusticesystemshavelongaimedatpreventingjudges’subjectivityfromhavinganyimpactoninthecourtroom.Agood,yetcomplexexampleisthecaseofsentencing,whereanexampleoftryingtominimisejudges’subjectivityaretheinfamoussentencinggrids,usedbydifferentUSAjurisdictions,whichhaveenteredthesentencingstagepromisingtolimitjudicialdiscretionthuseliminatingjudges’subjectivityandconsequentlysentencingdisparity.Tosaythepromisewasnotquitekeptisanunderstatement.Othersystems,relyingonlessdetailedguidelinesorstatutoryregulationhaveleftmoreroomfortheindividualisationofsentences,butinparallelforsubjectivityaswell.

Amodernoptiontotackletheissuehasemergedwiththedevelopmentsinprocessingbigdata.Bigdatahassofarenteredcriminaljusticeatthreelevels:bail,sentencing,andparole.Theyallutilisealargeamountofpreviouslydecidedcasestobuildastrongalgorithmabletopredictthebestpossibleanswertothegivenquestioninaspecificcase.Theoutcomestheyofferaredata-drivenprobabilitiesofrequestedinstances.

Theclearanswerssuchalgorithmsareabletoproduceareveryalluring.Theybringpromisesofafairersystem:informeddecisionsdevoidofbiasandanykindofsubjectivity.Therearemanypotentialbenefitsofbringingtogethertechnologicalaccuracyandhumanempathy:suchdecisionscouldbemuchmoreaccurateandbasedonasoundanalysisofpredictivefactors.Seenasmoreobjective,suchalgorithmscouldinstilthelong-losttrustofthepublicinthefairnessofthecriminaljusticesystem.Moreover,theymaypresentanopportunitytopurposefullyre-shapethepenalsysteminordertoreflectprogressivevaluesandsupportamorehumaneoutlook.

However,therearesomeimportantconsiderationstobemadebeforeembarkingonthebig-data-saviour-of-justicewagonwhichwewilldiscussindetail.

Wedon’tknowwhattheQuestionsare,butweknowwe'regonnafindtheAnswersAlexanderCzadilek,ChristofTschohlandWalterHötzendorfer

epicenter.works,ResearchInstituteVienna

BigDatahasbeendiscussedintheDataProtectionLawcommunityforseveralyearsnow.However,thebigquestionsstillremain.Inthispaper,wediscusssomeofthesequestions.Westronglybeliefthatdataprotectionisnotanendinitselfbutacatalysttoachievemorefundamentalaims.Therefore,wewillstartfromafundamental(andfundamentalrights)perspective,askingwhattheprotectivepurposeofDataProtectionLawactuallyisandwhatthatmeansforBigData.WewillthendelveintothenewlegislativeactsofEUDataProtectionLaw,theGeneralDataProtectionRegulation(Regulation(EU)2016/679,GDPR)andthePoliceandCriminalJusticeAuthoritiesDirective(Directive(EU)2016/680)toanalysetheirimplicationsontheuseofBigData.Akeypointhereistheprincipleofpurposelimitationandthenewrulesonfurtherprocessingforcompatiblepurposes(Art.5(1)(b)andArt.6(4)GDPR).

33

Anotherimportantissueisprofilingandautomateddecisionmakingforlawenforcement,criminaljusticeandotherpurposesbasedonBigData.Here,notonlylegalaspectsbutalsotheimplicationsoffactualpsychologicalmechanismshavetobeconsidered,suchasanover-confidentbeliefintheresultscalculatedbysoftwaresystems(“machines”).Itmustalsobeconsideredwhetherresults,withbothnegativeandpositiveconsequencesforasuspect,aretakenup(principleofmaterialtruth).

Finally,weask,whetherandhowtheproblemswedescribedcanberesolved.Inourview,PrivacybyDesignwillplayamajorrole.Basedonourexperiencebothinresearchprojectsandcommercialprojectsweshowsomepracticalexamples.

34

AbouttheVenue


Poljanskinasip2SI-1000Ljubljana

TheFacultyofLawissituatedinthecenterofLjubljana,bytheDragonBridgeoverriverLjubljanica.

Locationonthemapofthecity

Linktotheofficialweb-siteoftheFacultyofLaw:W:http://www.pf.uni-lj.si/en/

Theorganizinginstitutions:

InstituteofCriminologyattheFacultyofLawLjubljanaand


Poljanskinasip2,1000Ljubljana,Slovenia

W:http://inst-krim.si/en/

Onbehalfoftheorganizer:

AssociateProf.Dr.AlešZavršnik

Thecity

LjubljanaisthelovelycapitalofSlovenia.Thecharmingcitycoversasurfaceareaof275km2andhasapopulationofabout276,000.Thecitycentre,abundantinculturalandarchitecturalpearlscanbeexploredbyfeetandthevarietyofpubs,barsandrestaurantsbythebanksoftheriverLjubljanica

offerapleasantexperienceattheendoftheday.

ForinformationonLjubljanayoumaycheckthefollowing:http://www.ljubljana.info/

http://www.ljubljana-calling.com/ENG/index.asp

Slovenia

SloveniaisayoungEuropeancountrywiththepopulationofalmosttwomillion.Inspiteofitssizeitoffersamixtureofgeographicalandculturalfeatures,fromthesunnyAlpstothegreen

Mediterranean,fromthePannonianfieldstotheKarststones.Becauseofitssizetheyareallwithinyourarm’sreach.

ForinformationonSlovenia,pleaserefertothefollowingweb-sites:http://www.slovenia.info/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slovenia

35

MapoftheBuildingoftheFacultyofLaw

36

VENUE:FacultyofLawinLjubljana

(FacultyofLaw,UniversityofLjubljana,Poljanskinasip2,1000Ljubljana,Slovenia)

TheFacultyofLaw,establishedin1919,isoneofthefoundingfacultiesoftheUniversityofLjubljanaandthelargestlawfacultyinSlovenia.Eversince,theFacultyhasoffereditsstudentsanintellectuallyexcitinglearningenvironmentwithhighacademicstandardsatundergraduateandpostgraduatelevels,promotingbothlegalknowledgeandcriticalthought.Today,itisnotonlytheoldestbutalsothelargestand–byanymeasure–thebestlawfacultyinSlovenia.TheFacultyboastsalargeteachingstaffworkinginninedepartments,sixfurtherassociatedresearchinstitutesandthemostextensivelawlibraryintheregion.GraduatesoftheLjubljanaFacultyofLawgoontoassumeimportantpositionsinsocietyandshapetheSlovenianlegalsystemandpractice,buttheFacultyalsonurturesitsinternationaloutlookandreputation.ThisisshownnotonlyintheEuropean,comparativeandinternationalfocusembodiedinstudyprogrammes,butalsointhehighmobilityofstudentsandteachingstaff,frequentvisitinglecturersandotherdistinguishedguests,successfulparticipationininternationalstudentcompetitionsandagrowingportfolioofinternationalconferencesandsimilareventstakingplaceattheFaculty.

37

Venue:FacultyofLaw,UniversityofLjubljanalocation

TheconferencewilltakeplaceintheseminarsandlectureroomsatthegroundflooroftheFacultyofLaw.TherewillbeindicationsattheentranceoftheFacultytoindicatewayforparticipants.

WIFIaccess

FreeWIFIwillbeavailabletoallparticipantsoftheBigdata:NewChallengesforLawandEthicsconference.Allnecessaryinformationonthiswillbeprovidedforwhenparticipantsarrivetothevenue.EDUROAMnetworkisavailable.

Cafeteria

Theorganiserswillprovideforcoffeebreaksfortheparticipantsduringbreaks.TheFacultycafeteriaisalsoavailabletoparticipants,itisopenfrom8amto15pm.Therearealsoshops(e.g.Spar)nearbyFacultywhereparticipantswillbeabletopurchasetheirownfood.

ContactInformation

[email protected].

38

HOSTCITY:Ljubljana

(Source:http://www.ljubljana.guide/how-to-travel/travel-to-ljubljana/)

Ljubljana,thecapitalofSlovenia,isthepoliticalandculturalheartoftheSloveniannation.Itisclassifiedasamid-sizedEuropeancity,buthaspreserveditssmall-townfriendlinessandrelaxedatmospherewhileprovidingallthefacilitiesofamoderncapital.Ljubljanaisauniquecitydottedwithpleasantpicturesqueplaceswhereyoucanexpectallkindsofnicelittlesurprises.ItisanimportantEuropeancommercial,business,exhibitionandcongressionalcentreaswellasthetransport,scienceandeducationcentreofSlovenia.

Whetheryou'retakingastrolldowntheCongresssquareoralongsideriverbanksyoucanfeelandseetheatmospherethatsurroundsthebeautifulbutyetsmallcitycentre.Todayscientistsaredrawntothecitybecauseofitshigh-calibreinstitutesanduniversity,ofwhichespeciallylawschoolandmedicalschoolareatoppickintheregion,asareartistsduetoitsworld-famousgraphicbiennial,artacademyandcountlessartgalleries.Internationalbusinessmen,economistsandexpertsfromallfieldsfrequentlyattendthecity'smanybusinessandcongressionalmeetings,exhibitionsandtradefairs.

Ljubljanaisalsoacityofculture.Itishometonumeroustheatres,museumsandgalleries,andhostsoneoftheoldestphilharmonicorchestrasintheworld.ForthepeopleofLjubljana,cultureisawayofliving.Over10,000culturaleventstakeplaceinthecityeveryyear,amongwhichthereare10internationalfestivals.

Forfurtherinformationpleasevisit:https://www.visitljubljana.com/en/visitors/

39

OTHERIMPORTANTINFORMATION

Currency

SloveniaisaEuropeanUnionmemberstatethereforetheofficialcurrencyistheeuro(€).Itwasintroducedatthebeginningof2007.Mostshopsacrossthecountryacceptinternationalcreditanddebitcards.Sloveniahasawidespreadcashmachinenetwork.

MedicalAssistance

Pharmacies:Incaseofminorhealthproblemssuchascolds,headaches,temperatureabovenormal,andinsectbites,medicinescanbeobtainedfrompharmaciesalsowithoutaprescription.TherearenumerouspharmaciesinLjubljana,whichareopenfrom8.00amuntil19.00pm.TheLekarnapriPoliklinikidutypharmacyisopen24hoursaday,sevendaysaweek(Address:Njegoševacesta6k,1000Ljubljana,tel.:+386(0)12306100).

Emergencymedicalservices:

• Forrescueandemergencyservices,callthefreephonenumber112.

• 24-houremergencyGPservicesforadultsareprovidedbytheEmergencyUnitoftheLjubljanaUniversityMedicalCentre,entrancefromtheBohoričevaulicastreet,1000Ljubljana.

40

Notes

big data: new challenges for law and...

Documents