首页> 外文期刊>Information & communications technology law >Systematically handicapped? Social research in the data protection framework
【24h】

Systematically handicapped? Social research in the data protection framework

机译:系统性残障?数据保护框架中的社会研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Through a careful analysis of the UK's Data Protection Act 1998, this article demonstrates that the EU regime for personal data processing seriously threatens research into social (including political and historical) affairs. The core values of data protection - certainty, transparency, notice, informational self-determination, data minimization and secrecy - are in clear tension with the often fluid, norm-challenging, sometimes covert, individual and even identifiable nature of much social research. Three of its key provisions, the 'fair and lawful processing' requirement (principle one), the right of subject access (principle six) and the general ban on extra-EEA data export (principle eight), are in serious conflict with key research methodologies. Moreover, especially given the broad definition of 'personal data' under this regime, the labyrinthine nature of the law as a whole has led to universities implementing research governance policies and procedures that further restrict investigative activity. This curtails academic freedom leaving key forms of knowledge production systematically handicapped, thereby damaging society's long term interests. The article argues that consideration should be given to whether social research could benefit from the more liberal data protection arrangements for 'journalism literature and art'. In addition, the effects of this regime on academia must be fully addressed in the review of the law now underway.
机译:通过对英国《 1998年数据保护法》的仔细分析,本文证明了欧盟的个人数据处理制度严重威胁着对社会(包括政治和历史)事务的研究。数据保护的核心价值(确定性,透明性,通知性,信息自决性,数据最小化和保密性)与许多社会研究通常具有流动性,挑战性,有时甚至是隐蔽性,个体性甚至可识别性的性质有着明显的张力。它的三个关键条款,即“公平合法处理”要求(原则一),主题访问权(原则六)和全面禁止EEA数据导出的一般原则(原则八)与关键研究严重冲突。方法论。此外,特别是考虑到在此制度下对“个人数据”的广义定义,整个法律的迷宫性质导致大学实施研究管理政策和程序,从而进一步限制了调查活动。这限制了学术自由,使关键的知识生产形式受到系统性的阻碍,从而损害了社会的长期利益。文章认为,应考虑社会研究是否可以从“新闻文学和艺术”的更为宽松的数据保护安排中受益。此外,该制度对学术界的影响必须在目前正在进行的法律审查中得到充分解决。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号