Publicación: Estadio intermedio de reflexión para una futura regulación de la ética en el espacio digital europeo: los principios de transparencia y accountability
No hay miniatura disponible
Fecha
2021
Editor/a
Director/a
Tutor/a
Coordinador/a
Prologuista
Revisor/a
Ilustrador/a
Derechos de acceso
Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0 Internacional
info:eu-repo/semantics/embargoedAccess
info:eu-repo/semantics/embargoedAccess
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Thomson Reuters Aranzadi
Resumen
Partimos en el espacio digital actual, por efecto de la evolución de las tecnologías que se incluyen en la inteligencia Digital, de una terminología “móvil” a tres, a saber, IA-AI-BD, que dificulta la aplicación de la normativa desarrollada y que no hace sino converger creando cierta perplejidad o agnosticismo en su diferenciación. También nos encontramos con la aparición de soft-law en forma de Directrices que presuponen estamos en una primera fase en la reflexión de la ética a implantar en el MUD que suponga un freno a la tecnología disruptiva. Y en dicha reflexión, concluimos que los principios reinantes en la protección del derecho a la protección de datos personales, y en particular los principios de transparencia y de responsabilidad en el tratamiento de datos personales, evolucionan hacia el “derecho a la explicación” de la lógica del algoritmo y “la responsabilidad proactiva” o accountability. La reflexión propiciada por la Comisión con el lanzamiento de su Libro Blanco en Inteligencia Artificial-Una aproximación europea para la excelencia y la confianza, lanzado en febrero 2020, ha llevado el 20 octubre al Parlamento Europeo a proponer la concreción de los principios del RGPD en otros instrumentos también vinculantes. Así, la Propuesta de Reglamento Marco de los aspectos éticos de la inteligencia artificial, la robótica y las tecnologías conexas y la modificación de aquellas legislaciones sectoriales como la Directiva de responsabilidad por productos defectuosos*, de los que sólo daremos noticia pues acaban de gestarse al cierre de estas páginas. * Resolución del Parlamento Europeo, de 20 de octubre de 2020, con recomendaciones destinadas a la Comisión sobre un régimen de responsabilidad civil en materia de inteligencia artificial [2020/2014(INL)] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA- 9-2020-0276_ES.html#title1 / Civil liability regime for artificial.
We start in the current digital space, due to the evolution of the technologies included in Digital intelligence, from a "mobile" terminology to three, namely IA-AI-BD, which makes it difficult to apply the regulations developed that only converge creating a certain perplexity or agnosticism in their differentiation. We also find the appearance of soft law in the form of Guidelines that presuppose we are in a first phase in the reflection of the ethics to be implemented in the MUD that supposes a brake on disruptive technology. And in this reflection, we conclude that the prevailing principles in the protection of the right to protection of personal data, and in particular the principles of transparency and responsibility in the processing of personal data, evolve towards the "right to explanation" of the algorithm logic and "proactive responsibility" or accountability. The reflection process provoked by the Comission through the launching of the document “White Paper on Artificial Intelligence – A European approach to excellence and trust”, in February 2020, took the European Parliament to propose, in October 2020, to implement the principles of GDPR into other instruments equally binding. Such is the case with the Proposal for a Regulation on ethical principles for the development, deployment and use of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies, and the amendment of existing instruments, such as the Directive on liability for defective products, of which we can only give notice, since they saw the light just as this work was going to press.
We start in the current digital space, due to the evolution of the technologies included in Digital intelligence, from a "mobile" terminology to three, namely IA-AI-BD, which makes it difficult to apply the regulations developed that only converge creating a certain perplexity or agnosticism in their differentiation. We also find the appearance of soft law in the form of Guidelines that presuppose we are in a first phase in the reflection of the ethics to be implemented in the MUD that supposes a brake on disruptive technology. And in this reflection, we conclude that the prevailing principles in the protection of the right to protection of personal data, and in particular the principles of transparency and responsibility in the processing of personal data, evolve towards the "right to explanation" of the algorithm logic and "proactive responsibility" or accountability. The reflection process provoked by the Comission through the launching of the document “White Paper on Artificial Intelligence – A European approach to excellence and trust”, in February 2020, took the European Parliament to propose, in October 2020, to implement the principles of GDPR into other instruments equally binding. Such is the case with the Proposal for a Regulation on ethical principles for the development, deployment and use of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies, and the amendment of existing instruments, such as the Directive on liability for defective products, of which we can only give notice, since they saw the light just as this work was going to press.
Descripción
Categorías UNESCO
Palabras clave
Ética, Inteligencia Artificial, Big-Data, Macrodatos, Algoritmo inteligente, Principio de transparencia, Derecho de explicación, Perjuicio, Ethic, Artificial Intelligence, Big- Data, Intelligence algorithm, Principle of Transparency, Right to explanation
Citación
Centro
Facultad de Derecho
Departamento
Derecho Civil