Blockchain and human rights

View Item Repository Home JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it. Blockchain and journalism: the intersection between blockchain-based technology and freedom of the press. Author Veit, Meredith. Metadata Show full item record.

We are searching data for your request:

Blockchain and human rights

Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Content:

• If Consumers Want Ethical Products, Blockchain May Be Their Best Bet
• Supply Chain Act for Human Rights
• SourceLess Blockchain in partnership with the International Organization of Human Rights
• Blockchain for Good? Improving supply chain transparency and human rights management
• Blockchain technologies offer transparency that could improve human rights practices
• Blockchain in the Changing Landscape of Human Rights
• Please wait while your request is being verified...
• Beyond the Hype of Blockchain Technology
• Blockchain technology for the public good: Design constraints in a human rights context

WATCH RELATED VIDEO: Blockchain and Human Rights - Ivan on Tech

If Consumers Want Ethical Products, Blockchain May Be Their Best Bet

The right to have your personal data erased, the so-called right to be forgotten, granted by the European acquis, is tested on the basis of the interest involved. This operation must be carried out on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the contextual elements and the specifics interests of the subject involved. The right to be forgotten in European case law. Identity management tools for managing the right to be forgotten. Internet never forgets. In our digital age it is impossible to forget.

The web has the ability to "bring to the surface" , through the insertion of even a single word, data and facts referring to events that occurred many years ago or published in newspapers that have, to date, digitized their archives. Basically, there can be no perfect forgetting on the web.

Can data be deleted from the web once entered? What is the right to be forgotten and how is it implemented in the digital environment of the 21st century? The legislation is a good starting point in order to answer to the previous questions. Therefore, data controllers are obliged if they have "made public" the personal data of the data subject: for example, by publishing them on a website to inform controllers which are processing the personal data that the data subject has requested the erasure by such controllers, including "any link, copy or reproduction" see Art 17 2 of the GDPR.

This right has a broader scope than the one already provided by the Privacy Code in art. In this context, it is clear that search engines are of fundamental importance as information intermediaries. They are true meta-instruments of digital knowledge. Indeed, once a word is entered into the search field of a search engine, all relevant information appears on the screen in a methodical order.

The amount of information thus collected and stored by search engines is mind-boggling and can be dangerous , and for this reason, European and domestic legislators brought order to the chaos. As a matter of fact, in the deep sea of knowledge of the web it is likely that some facts injurious to the dignity of a subject come out after a long time and it is their right to ask for their erasure.

In this situation the balance of interests with the freedom of expression and the right to information comes into play. In recent years, the question of how search engines should balance privacy rights with freedom of information has aroused the interest of jurists and judges and the rulings of the European Court of Justice, the European Court of Human Rights as well as the important judgements of national Constitutional Courts.

In , the European Court of Justice ECJ in the Google Spain case ruled that European citizens had the right to require search engines, such as Google and Bing , to remove "inaccurate, inadequate, irrelevant or excessive" results linked to their name.

In this case, the ECJ upheld a judgment of the Spanish court that had ordered Google to remove the links to newspaper articles about the Spanish citizen Costeja Gonzalez. In particular, those links related to some bankruptcy proceedings concerning debts of various kinds dating back to the late s. Google complied by partially removing the search results on its domains. This was done on the basis of the circumstance that many states outside the European Union do not recognize the right to delisting, thus considering that "the right to the protection of personal data is not an absolute prerogative but must be considered in the light of its social function and must be balanced with other fundamental rights, in accordance with the principle of proportionality".

Most recently, the European Court of Human Rights ECtHR decided in in the Apollonia case that Germany had rightly denied two individuals their right to be forgotten in connection with press archives relating to a murder.

In the light of this, it is clear that the search engine operator has a difficult task to ensure that an individual's personal data is lawfully processed for specified , explicit and legitimate purposes, that it is adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to those purposes, that it is accurate, updated and that it is kept for a period of time not exceeding that necessary to achieve those purposes.

This is the background to the judgment of the Court of Luxembourg Manni case , which revealed the relationship between data retention and deletion times. Indeed, such an operation must be guided by a careful "case-by-case assessment" that takes into account the contextual elements and the specific interests of third parties potentially involved [ 1 ].

In light of this, legal tech and AI tools would be useful devices for determining the truthfulness and accuracy of personal data. Search engines, such as Google, have adopted a number of solutions to handle user requests for the removal of untrue or inaccurate information. Remarkably, the Google Advisory Council - appointed specifically to define the operational aspects of exercising the right to be forgotten - has agreed that false and inaccurate information contributes to shifting the needle of the scales towards strengthening the privacy of the subject rather than towards the widespread public interest in knowledge.

In this context, the burden of proof to demonstrate the inaccuracy of the data for which delisting is requested, falls on the subject concerned. As a matter of fact, the large number of requests that need to be followed up quickly increases the likelihood of human error and exposes the interested parties and third-party stakeholders to prejudicial situation s. For this reason, to support this process, the same tools that define privacy could be useful precisely to its same strengthening, allowing each user to customize the protection of their identity by preventing injury to the right to privacy and at the same time help owners and managers to keep updated and accurate personal data of stakeholders.

All of the above processed only by an algorithm! Already, identity management tools allow users to view and modify the personal data that the owner processes. The problem lingers in the handling of delisting requests.

If search engines were to fully automate the process as several operators have already done would the algorithm be able to guarantee the effective implementation of the right to be forgotten?

In the writer's opinion, in order to continue to manage a huge amount of personal data while guaranteeing the protection of the right to be forgotten in the digital environment while respecting all the other rights and interests involved, a strong human component will remain necessary in the balancing test, as also affirmed by the European Court.

Such a balancing test is probably not transposable into an algorithm. Presumably, the solution is just around the corner. Undoubtedly, with the advent of blockchain and [ 2 ] increasingly transparent decentralized systems, it could be easier for search engines to guarantee a more effective and immediate protection of users' rights, activating that still distant principle of "accountability" of the data controller envisaged by the GDPR.

In this regard, it is good to highlight some issues when blockchain and the right to be forgotten sit at the same table. Indeed, how can the right to be forgotten be combined with the unchangeable nature of a blockchain? One of the solutions could be the possibility of entering data into a blockchain only as an external link, thus leaving the data out of the chain. However, by doing so, the data could no longer be used securely and would be subject to potentially indiscriminate modification.

Another solution could be anonymization, which, however, in turn presents several issues. In a blockchain, everything is encrypted , therefore, the data should be protected.

But encryption, though secure, is not infallible and can be hacked. Probably, in the not-so-distant future we will be able to solve many of the open questions between the introduction of a blockchain-based system and the implementation of GDPR regulations. In the meantime, let's begin to think about the important issues that have emerged around the right to be forgotten and its balancing against competing fundamental rights.

The Impact Lawyers offers a FREE newsletter that keeps you up to date on news and analysis about the international latest legal news. Please complete the form below and click on subscribe to receive The Impact Lawyers Newsletter subscription.

The right to be forgotten: from the balance of interests to the blockchain. Table of contents 1. Introduction 2. The right to be forgotten in European case law 3. Identity management tools for managing the right to be forgotten 4. Conclusions [This content can be read also on LegalTechItalia ]. Agree to privacy policy. Full article The right to be forgotten: from the balance of interests to the blockchain 1. Introduction Internet never forgets.

Source: Freepik 2. The right to be forgotten in European case law In recent years, the question of how search engines should balance privacy rights with freedom of information has aroused the interest of jurists and judges and the rulings of the European Court of Justice, the European Court of Human Rights as well as the important judgements of national Constitutional Courts.

Identity management tools for managing the right to be forgotten In light of this, legal tech and AI tools would be useful devices for determining the truthfulness and accuracy of personal data.

Conclusion Presumably, the solution is just around the corner. See article references. Paragraph 64, Manni Judgment. If you want to learn more about blockchain click here. All rights reserved. This information or any part of it may not be copied or disseminated in any way or by any means or downloaded or stored in an electronic database or retrieval system without the express written consent of The Impact Lawyers. The opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions or policies of The Impact Lawyers.

Related videos. Increase your income and gain opportunities as a lawyer v 0. Related podcasts. Innovation by legal design: a glimpse of your future! Kristina Lazatian.

Book: Legal Marketing from a competent law firm to a competitive one. Related articles. Essential Guide: Onboarding v 0. BonelliErede introduces its ESG group v 0. Know your client v 0. ICSID annual report shows shift towards remote hearings v 0. The fight against organised crime in Italy: The figure of the receiver as a collaborator of the judge v 0. Fintech: financial technology, artificial intelligence and Legaltech v 0.

Blockchain and its possible applications in the legal sector v 0. Contact Sitemap Subscribe. Contact us lawyers theimpactlawyers. Subscribe for free. The Impact Lawyers Newsletter Practical templates and guides for lawyers and law firms Podcasts, videos and webinars explaining how to be sucessful Tips made by lawyers and other practitioners.

Your experience on this site will be improved by allowing cookies. Allow cookies.

Supply Chain Act for Human Rights

Blockchain technology has been heralded as a disruptive agent that has the potential to change the implementation of programs and services in many sectors. As such, blockchain has been celebrated as a potential tool for good : a means to promote transparency, build trust and reputation, and enhance the efficiency of transactions. It has even been considered as a solution to addressing poverty , particularly in the Global South. However, it is important to remember that implementing applications on the blockchain is a tool, like many other digital and non-digital tools.

SourceLess Blockchain in partnership with the International Organization of Human Rights

The Voice of Political Science around the World. In this paper, I discuss the various ways that blockchain technology can be applied to improve upon international human rights. I specifically examine the United Nations and its activities it pertains to the use of blockchain technology. I argue that while this technology is rather new the United Nations has been open to using such technological innovations to better solve human rights challenges that include fighting to end child trafficking, better food aid distribution, along with possibilities of using the blockchain and cryptocurrencies to help reduce carbon emissions. Following an examination of ways that the United Nations and other nongovernmental organizations have approached blockchain technology, I then summarize the main points of the paper. I end the article by discussing future possibilities for additional blockchain technology uses for international human rights. Membership Related Inquiries membership ipsa. Webmaster webmaster ipsa. LOG IN.

Blockchain for Good? Improving supply chain transparency and human rights management

International Institutions. Imagining our Post-Pandemic Futures. Litigating the Climate Emergency. Pandemic Insights.

Blockchain technologies offer transparency that could improve human rights practices

Digital technologies offer great potential for the marginalised populations of the world in many dimensions of their lives, including communication, commerce, financial inclusion, disaster recovery and the delivery of aid. However, digital technologies can also play a divisive role. By enabling the powerful who can access key information and who have the capability to develop infrastructure, it often penalises those who cannot, especially the most disadvantaged. This is consequently increasing inequality and marginalisation. In this respect, technology is not neutral, and its design can strongly influence and shape our future society. We argue that distributed ledger technologies present an opportunity for marginalised populations , by empowering them to manage their data and business practices and achieve demarginalisation by involving the community in a decentralised manner.

Blockchain in the Changing Landscape of Human Rights

On one hand, the bitcoin industry has matured to include traditional brokerages and institutional traders. On the other, bitcoin privacy tech is still shrouded in a legal gray zone. CoinSwap, a mixing technique originally invented in by Greg Maxwell, is part of a comprehensive suite of privacy tools being developed by bitcoin advocates. Theoretically, any wallet provider could use the open source code to add the feature to their mobile app or desktop app. Privacy-focused wallets could even use CoinSwap features as another layer to current CoinJoin offerings. Both CoinSwaps and CoinJoins are a type of non-custodial mixing, which could theoretically be layered as two privacy tools used in the same transaction. CoinSwaps are comparable to atomic swaps , while CoinJoin options typically pool disparate funds together as part of the transaction.

Please wait while your request is being verified...

Before announcing the winner, a little thematic detour. It was interesting and in hindsight not surprising to see how many readers express a critical opinion on the topic of cryptocurrencies and especially NFTs. In our role as a software producer, we are inclined to see every technical innovation with positive curiosity. However we have also experienced ourselves how chess has been intensely changed by the introduction of technology, and are thus used to meaningful critical views as well as to enthusiastic adoption.

Beyond the Hype of Blockchain Technology

RELATED VIDEO: Blockchain As Monitor Of Human Rights

Cryptocurrencies are getting a lot of attention, but finance is only one of many applications of the blockchain technology behind it. Blockchain technology is poised to revolutionise almost everything from supply chains including illegal fishing and human rights abuses , insurance and health. It is flourishing in an open-source environment, which raises the question whether our current intellectual property laws are fit for purpose to foster innovation. Read more: Demystifying the blockchain: a basic user guide. Intellectual property laws, such as patents and copyright, are premised on the incentive theory. To incentivise people to create, they are given, in effect, a monopoly with some exceptions on their creations and can go to court and stop others from free-riding on their work.

Blockchain technology for the public good: Design constraints in a human rights context

Feb 20, 21 min read. Max Schmid. Sebastian Porsdam Mann. Ben Linders. Blockchain is, for many people, still synonymous with cryptocurrencies and financial applications. Yet the features that make blockchain technologies so appealing for asset management and monetary transactions -- transparency, tamper-resistance, efficiency, and smart contracts, to name just a few -- are also useful in areas that have little to do with finance. In my day job as a bioethicist, I look for solutions - ranging from the philosophical to the technological - to novel or well-known problems that affect us all.

Blockchain is a disruptive technology presented in that allows both scarcity and timestamps to be introduced to the digital world. Whereas many technological applications may benefit from this architecture, it involves direct conflict with both Privacy rights and Data Protection rules, as introduced by the General Data Protection Regulation GDPR. This study first provides an overview of what blockchain is, how it works, and how it can affect privacy. It describes how this technology functions, thanks to binary ledgers distributed amongst the system nodes, and what role they play in validating the succession of blocks.